Étiquette : Mad Meg
Leo Spaepen deciphers Bruegel’s code
On Saturday, July 11, Karel Vereycken spoke with Leo Spaepen, classicist and retired art history teacher, author of the book De Bruegel Code. Pieter Bruegel the Elder, political commentator and pacifist. (In Dutch, published by MER Books, 2025, ISBN 9789493410732, €39.90).
Karel Vereycken contributed with some footnotes.
Interview: « Bruegel painted history! »
Karel Vereycken: Dear Leo, you have written a wonderful book: The Bruegel Code. We are standing here at a historic location in the center of Wijnegem: the old inn De Swaen, which is depicted in its former shape in a painting by Bruegel, The Census at Bethlehem (1566, Royal Museums of Fine Arts, Brussels). Based on that discovery, after much study, you have developed a completely new perspective on Bruegel and his work. Can you tell us something about the origins of your book?
Leo Spaepen: That is a long history, going back to my childhood years. After all, I have always had a sentimental connection to this little building, because I grew up in the neighborhood. Moreover, as a young municipal councilor, I fought to save this piece of heritage from demolition. But back then, I had no idea that it had anything to do with Bruegel.
Right: Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Census at Bethlehem , detail (KMSK Brussels).
Are people being counted here or taxes collected?
This only became clear in 2004, when a historian from Wijnegem discovered that the inn De Swaen stands in the center of Bruegel’s painting The Census at Bethlehem. An identical building appears in a drawing from the Louvre, which was attributed to Pieter Bruegel the Elder (circa 1525-1569). Below that sketch, written in pencil, one can read: ‘At Wijnegem.’
From that, we could already deduce that the painting itself might also have had something to do with Wijnegem. A further step came with the research by Tine Meganck, who worked for the Brussels museum in 2018.
She established the connection with the sixteenth-century lord of Wijnegem, Jan Vleminck (1527-1568)1 , on whose domain the inn stood and who was therefore the owner thereof.
According to Meganck, it was this Jan Vleminck who commissioned the painting from Breugel to immortalize his appointment as Lord of Wijnegem and his right to collect taxes there.2
At first glance, that painting deals with only a Biblical subject, specifically a census during the time of Emperor Augustus. But if we look a little closer, we see the « double bottom. » The people in the painting are not only registering themselves, but they are also paying dues and taxes owed to the new lord of Wijnegem!
KV: So they go to Bethlehem to be counted, but their journey ends in Wijnegem, where they suddenly have to pay taxes…
LS: Yes, it is a bit surreal. Bruegel actually mixes two stories together here: a biblical one and a contemporary one. We could put it differently as a joke: the painting actually shows that Jesus Christ was not born in Bethlehem, but in Wijnegem in Belgium!
After reading the work of Tine Meganck, I started thinking about this way of composing. So Bruegel was working with two layers of meaning here: a superficial and a deeper meaning. I wondered: if he blended two stories in The Census, did he perhaps not apply the same process in other paintings as well?
Thorough research revealed that this was indeed the case. The discovery of that consistent pattern was a surprise and represented a major breakthrough in Bruegel studies, as many well-known paintings that had never been properly understood suddenly received a simple and, moreover, coherent explanation.
KV: So that’s where the name ‘The Bruegel Code’ comes from, a kind of key you found to understand his work?
LS: Certainly, and that key is actually very simple. Bruegel made comparisons: narrative A is reminiscent of narrative B. The payment of taxes to Jan Vleminck reminded him of the census in the time of Augustus, because in both cases people flocked somewhere to have themselves registered. Based on this associative connection, he thus made two stories into one painting with an ambiguous meaning.
KV: In that way, Bruegel could therefore actually comment on the political events of his time.
LS: Yes, and The Census at Bethlehem is merely an innocent example. But if we look at other paintings by Bruegel, we see that this technique of the double meaning is not so innocent. After all, the deeper layer of meaning usually has to do with the bitter political and religious conflict of that time: the struggle of the Catholic rulers against the rising Protestantism.
Those in power were King Philip II of Spain at the top, and locally the Regent of the Netherlands, Margaret of Parma, and her advisor Cardinal Granvelle, who had to act as a watchdog to ensure that she properly followed the instructions of the big boss.
Philip II of Spain
KV: Together with the other members of the ‘Secret Council.’3
LS: Indeed. There was no such thing as democracy or freedom of speech back then, so social criticism was always dangerous. Bruegel therefore had to hide his commentaries under a thick outer layer. This allowed him, for example, to adopt pacifist positions that could not be seen if one looked only superficially at the biblical story.
The Massacre of the Innocents in Bethlehem
In the same year as The Census at Bethlehem (1566), he painted The Massacre of the Innocents at Bethlehem, in which he clearly spoke out against the violence of the iconoclasts.4
He hid the A-narrative, about the destruction of works of art by religious fanatics, under the B-narrative about innocent children who were killed by the soldiers of King Herod.
Is this a brutal massacre or grievous vandalism?
KV: Thanks to that method, the painter was also able to escape prosecution himself.
LS: Yes, because he himself was strongly influenced by a German « guru » with unorthodox religious views.5 He therefore had to be doubly careful when he targeted the Catholic rulers in his paintings, which were sometimes genuine political cartoons, for he could easily be accused of sympathizing with heresy. Not without reason, by the way.
Dulle Griet
KV: Criticism of the ruling elite is certainly present in De Dulle Griet (also known as Mad Meg —1563, Museum Mayer van den Bergh, Antwerp), perhaps the most difficult and least understood painting ever created in the Low Countries. Your book provides us with a new and surprising interpretation of this work.
LS: I only had to apply the formula I discovered in The Census to that painting. But that took some effort, because both the A and B narratives of Dulle Griet were unknown. But not in those days! Back then, everyone knew the story of the woman who was so audacious that she dared to commit a robbery under the nose of the devil in hell. That character comes from a rhetorician’s farce that has now been lost. Reconstructing that story was a greater challenge than finding the political story behind it. For I soon realized that ‘Griet’ is nothing other than the shortened, popular first name of Margaret of Parma. And who that central figure with his rose-red cloak is also quickly became clear to me: Granvelle, the bishop, cardinal, and advisor to Margaret of Parma.
Are women fighting men here, or Catholics fighting heretics?
KV: Why is the cardinal in the painting scattering money from his rear-end over the women?
LS: That dangerous detail refers to the fact that Granvelle paid citizens to denounce the Protestants to the Inquisition. In narrative B, that giant was normally supposed to throw stones, but because stones and money didn’t go together, Bruegel had to choose and used the ‘safe’ version with the stones in a model drawing that he for all security preserved in his workshop. The drawing, which is now part of the collection of the Kunstpalast in Düsseldorf, implicitly confirms the correctness of the discovered code of interpretation.
There is also that basket of valuable household goods and jewels that Griet holds under her arm. This refers to the robbery committed in hell in narrative B, but also to the confiscation of the possessions of the condemned heretics in narrative A. Those heretics were first stripped of their goods before being sent to the stake. And that stake is, of course, hell, into which Griet drives them with her sword.
We can therefore interpret all the details of the painting in two ways. In the same way, we can separate the two stories: on the one hand, the struggle between lazy men and angry women, and on the other, the struggle between ‘bad’ heretics and ‘good’ Catholics. Everything is ambiguous. A magnificent puzzle!
KV: You write in your introduction that Bruegel as a political commentator and a pacifist is not new, but that this view of the painter is certainly not universally accepted.
LS: In Belgium, the ‘deniers’ are still very dominant, as I have experienced firsthand. For instance, articles on political interpretations of Bruegel are rejected under all sorts of pretexts. Abroad, however, the question of whether there are political messages in Bruegel’s work has actually been investigated for quite some time. However, this always concerned only one, two, or at most three paintings, and never yielded convincing results.
In Maastricht, for example, an exhibition ran in 2021 titled: Art as Hidden Resistance?6 With a Question Mark. It concerned the painting The Procession to Calvary, but the question mark and the doubt could not be removed. Art historians in Germany and America have also been engaged in this research for some time, consistently resulting in vague guessing.
To my great surprise, however, no one had ever systematically searched for connections between Bruegel’s paintings and the current events of the time. I therefore arranged not two or three, but all the allegorical paintings chronologically myself, and then confronted them with the events of the 1560s as described in chronicles, letters, and history books. That research confirmed, based on numerous clues, that Pieter Bruegel the Elder closely followed the political-religious conflict of his time in at least fifteen paintings, up to and including the first battles of the Eighty Years’ War (1568-1648).
So my book is not just about art, but also about history, and especially about the connection between the two. Bruegel painted history!
KV: Thanks again for this fascinating work, which I believe is an important step towards a better understanding of Bruegel and our cultural history.
(Message to the viewer:) So buy this book, and above all: read it!
FOOTNOTES:
- The Vleminck family settled in Antwerp, where she played an important role in international trade. Jan Vleminck married Isabella Schetz on July 21, 1561, daughter of banker Gaspar Schetz (1513-1580). Together with Balthazar and Melchior, Gaspar was one of the three sons of Emperor Charles’s Antwerp banker Erasmus Schetz, who was also a friend and financier of Erasmus. Melchior Schetz was the Prince of the Antwerp rhetoric chamber De Violieren and, in that capacity, together with external mayor Anthonis Van Straelen, a key figure in the organization of the glorious Antwerp Landjuweel of 1561. ↩︎
- Tine Luk Meganck, ‘Census at Bethlehem. Winter of a Golden Age’ in: Bruegel’s Winter Scenes. Historians and Art Historians in Dialogue, eds. Tine Luk Meganck and Sabine van Sprang, 2018, pp. 85-127. ↩︎
- Charles de Berlaymont (1510-1578), Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle (1517-1582) and Viglius van Aytta (1507-1577) were the three leading figures of the Privy Council (consulta), established by Emperor Charles V, in Bruegel’s time. ↩︎
- The Iconoclasm was a large-scale destruction of statues of saints and other objects at Catholic religious sites in the Low Countries, which took place in 1566. ↩︎
- More precise, the German mystic Hendrik Niclaes (1501–1580), founder in 1539 of the Familia Caritatis (‘House of Love’), an almost secret group that held great appeal for intellectuals, merchants, and artists. Niclaes called for an individual sense of God and believed that different views could be brought into harmony on a deeper level. It was a contemplative, tolerant attitude to life that largely appeared to be reserved for educated people. A philosopher like Socrates, who relativized all authority and worldly knowledge, enjoyed great popularity in these circles. Associated with the House of Love (without necessarily being a member thereof): printers Christoffel Plantijn, John Gailliart, the humanists Abraham Ortelius, Justus Lipsius, Andreas Masius, Goropius Becanus, Benito Arias Montano, the poets Peeter Heyns, Jan van der Noot, Lucas d’Heere, the painters Pieter Bruegel the Elder, Filips Galle, Joris Hoefnagel, the theologian Hubert Duifhuis, the writer Dirck Volkertsz. Coornhert, ‘familists’ Daniel van Bombergen, Emanuel van Meteren, Johan Radermacher and the Antwerp merchants Marcus Perez and Ferdinando Ximines. ↩︎
- Bonnefanten Museum, Maastricht. Catalogue: Bruegel and Contemporaries, Art as Hidden Resistance?, Lars Hendrikman and Dorien Tamis, Waanders Publishers, 2021. ↩︎
Pieter Bruegel the Elder, political commentator and pacifist
Five centuries after his birth, the publication of new research seems (finally) to do justice to the great Flemish painter « Pieter Bruegel the Jolly » , known as the Elder (1525-1569).
Until now, it was all too common to hear him described as « an unclassifiable figure. » In 2024, art historian Mónica Ann Walker Vadillo did not hesitate to write in the History section of the newspaper Le Monde that, since Bruegel painted peasant feasts and weddings, art critics « came to regard him as an unrefined man and disdainfully nicknamed him ‘Bruegel the Peasant,' » while expressing surprise that so many « academics, humanists, and wealthy businessmen—who appreciated his work and collected his paintings » associated with him.
Fall of the Rebel Angels
In 2014, Tine Luk Meganck ‘s book, « Pieter Bruegel the Elder. Fall of the Rebel Angels. Art, knowledge and Politics on the Eve of the Dutch Revolt », especially with the last sentence of her title, had nevertheless reopened the debate on the political dimension of his work.
Meganck ventured a highly improbable hypothesis regarding the painting The Fall of the Rebel Angels (1562, Brussels Museum): the jealous angels, whom God punishes for conspiring against him, are supposed to represent the alliance of nobles, the middle classes, and the common people, led by William the Silent against the rule of the Spanish Empire. Consequently, the commissioner of the work, according to the expert, was most likely the famous Cardinal Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle, one of the advisors to the regent Margaret of Parma and a fervent supporter of the persecution of heretics.
We have documented in an article why this interpretation seems unacceptable to us, as Cardinal Granvelle, a member of the « secret government, » was universally hated by the humanists of the time for his blind zeal in endorsing all the crimes of his masters.
Furthermore, no tangible proof exists that he commissioned any work from Bruegel. Certainly, he owned some, but apart from a « Flight into Egypt » (1563), a work devoid of any controversy, and a « View of the Bay of Naples, » a beautiful study inspired by drawings made during Bruegel’s trip to Italy, Granvelle was far from being « one of the greatest collectors » of Bruegel’s works, as is often repeated.
Landjuweel
That being said, the important contribution of Meganck’s book, let’s acknowledge it, was the recognition of the decisive influence of the Chambers of Rhetoric and the Antwerp Landjuweel of 1561, for understanding Bruegel’s visual language.
My friend, the late American art critic Michael Frances Gibson, had mentioned this possibility to me during an interview this author conducted with him.
He discusses this in his book The Carrying of the Cross (Editions Noêsis, Paris 1996), which was used in 2011 for the quite innovative film « Bruegel, the Mill and the Cross ».
In August 1561, Antwerp, where Bruegel resided, hosted an exceptional celebration, the Landjuweel, or national competition of the Chambers of Rhetoric.
In practice, the Antwerp Chamber « De Violieren« , in charge of organizing a festival that cost the city one hundred thousand crowns, operated as the literary division of the Guild of Saint Luke, the corporation that brought together painters, engravers, illustrators, architects, sculptors, cartographers, goldsmiths and printers.
It was there that people read in Flemish as well as in Latin or French, Plato, Homer, Petrarch, Erasmus and Rabelais, both during private gatherings and often, in public.
The first Bible in French? Printed in Antwerp in 1535 by the French humanist Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (1450-1536), who published the first translations of the complete works of Nicholas of Cusa in Paris in 1514, three years before the publication, in the French capital, of the first edition of Erasmus‘s In Praise of Folly.
The Landjuweel of Antwerp stands historically as one of the most remarkable cultural renaissance events in European history. 2000 rhetoricians on horseback, from 10 cities, passed under 40 triumphal arches to the strident sounds of fifes, entering a city in full celebration. For a whole month, orators and poets, songwriters and actors competed without pausing for breath. Citizen’s were invited on every streetcorner to participate in polyphonic madrigals and chorusses. 5000 artists entertained close to a 100,000 viewers !
Bruegel had to follow them all the more since his dear friend Hans Frankaert (1520-1584), his friend and master Peeter Baltens (1527-1584), very well connected with the great local financiers who preferred commerce to war, as well as his first patron, the engraver Hieronymus Cock (1518-1570), were all involved in the organization of this event whose theme was peace and, two centuries before Kant and Schiller, this burning philosophical question: « What leads man most towards the arts? » This, then, was the bubbling cauldron of urban culture in which Bruegel was immersed from his beginnings.
Moreover, as Belgian historian Leen Huet details in her sumptuous biography of the artist (first published in Dutch in 2016 by Polis, then in French by CFC in Brussels in 2021), when he crossed the Alps, Bruegel was probably accompanied by the painter Maarten de Vos (1532-1603) and the cartographer Abraham Ortelius (1527-1598), a close friend of Christophe Plantin, the head of the largest printing house in Antwerp, the team having thousands of addresses of collectors in connection with the printing house Les Quatre Vents of Jérôme Cock, in Antwerp.
The « Bruegel Code »
The image of Bruegel as a political commentator, deliberately obfuscating his message to thwart the regime’s Gestapo agents who were lying in wait for him, and embracing the Erasmian philosophy of the Landjuweel to defend peace and mutual understanding, is further developed by the classical historian Leo Spaepen, whose recent book, Pieter Bruegel de oude, politiek commentator en pacifist. De Bruegel Code (published in Dutch by MER Books, 2025), has stirred enthusiasm.
A good pedagogue, Spaepen establishes a kind of code for deciphering, or at least fruitfully approaching, Bruegel’s visual language. Escaping the Aristotelian confines, the aim is to immediately discard formal and symbolic representations in favor of what I would call a metaphorical approach.
Narrative A and B
Each painting contains a « narrative A » and a « narrative B. » The former typically reflects a concern shared by the humanist and Erasmian community regarding the socio-political events of the time, where corruption and violent Spanish repression brought the Hispano-Burgundian Netherlands to the brink of revolt. The « narrative B » often depicts a scene from the Bible or scripture.
As with any metaphor, the paradox arising from the analogy between narrative A and B brings forth, not on the canvas but in the viewer’s mind, a range of clues allowing them to grasp where the painter intends to lead them.
Spaepen, whose courage, rigor, and audacity deserve high praise, has sufficiently delved into the political and cultural history of Bruegel’s era to formulate compelling hypotheses that illuminate his major works. By testing this cognitive approach, painting by painting, the author generates not a scholarly compendium of facts or evidence, but an extremely interesting « gestalt » of the painter, whose true genius has often been denied recognition. It is therefore impossible, in a simple article like this, to reproduce the full richness of this approach.
« Mad Meg »
Let us nevertheless look at an emblematic work by Bruegel, known by its nickname, Dulle Griet (« Margot the Enraged » or « Mad Meg » ), a work painted in 1563, not to please a patron, but to provoke discussions with his relatives during meals at his home, as was the custom at the time.
The painting is striking in its contradictions. In the foreground, against a backdrop of burning cityscapes, a woman, mad with rage, sword in hand, carries a basket filled with jewels and precious metalwork. Behind her, a cohort of unarmed women bravely strives to subdue and repel an army of monsters and devils.
Finally, at the intersection of the painting’s diagonals, a strange creature appears, reminiscent of Hieronymus Bosch ‘s Garden of Earthly Delights. A man carrying a large bubble on his back shakes his backside, from which silver coins fall, which some women hastily gather up.
As for narrative B, we find roughly the image that Bruegel had developed in a drawing used for a 1557 engraving representing one of the deadly sins, here rage ( Ira in Latin), again represented by a giant woman, with the subtitle: « Rage swells the lips and sours the character. It troubles the mind and blackens the blood. »
Spaepen also picks up on (p. 131) a great find by Leen Huet. The historian discovered that during the Landjuweel of Antwerp in 1561, the chamber of rhetoric of Mechelen had mentioned a « Griete die den roof haelt voor den helle » (a girl who goes to plunder hell), a figure perhaps taken from a play that is now lost.
Huet also mentions (p. 35) the Flemish proverb that says of an old harpy that she « could go and plunder hell and come back safe and sound. » At the same time, Huet notes (p. 48), the author Sartorius , in a collection of adages inspired by Erasmus, states a saying similar in spirit to the Dulle Griet sign:
« One woman alone makes a racket, two women cause much trouble, three women gather only to trade for an annual market, four women lead to strife, five women form an army, and against six women, Satan himself has no weapon to fight them. »
In reality, the status of urban women from the 15th century onwards in Flanders, with the beguinages, and especially in Brabant in the 16th century, was one of the most advanced in Europe1, probably explaining in part the concerns of some members of the male gender in the face of the growing power of women.
Granvelle
But Spaepen, a good observer, exonerates Bruegel from this kind of masculinist reaction by bringing back the reality of narrative A, the current political situation.
The painter, Spaepen believes, is denouncing here Cardinal Granvelle , zealous advisor to the regent Margaret of Parma, a woman torn between the general interest and submission to the tyranny of the Catholic Church, whose dogmas were instrumentalized by Madrid to plunder the country in order to repay the colossal debt of Charles V and Philip II to the Fugger bankers.
Personally, I thought for a moment that Bruegel had invented for the occasion an 8th deadly sin, « incitement to war » (Oorlogstokerij), but I am probably too much in the present.
In August 1561, disregarding Granvelle’s advice, Margaret had authorized the Guild of Saint Luke and the Violieren to organize the Antwerp Landjuweel to promote peace and mutual understanding. But immediately afterward, she yielded to pressure from Madrid by forbidding the publication of the proceedings of the Chambers of Rhetoric, which were accused of having united the entire country against the Emperor.
In 1563, the year Bruegel painted his Dulle Griet, the Council of Trent decided to curb polyphonic art by restoring the primacy of the sung text in music and prohibiting any ambiguity in a painting, linked to a role of propaganda, exactly as Granvelle wished.
In the painting « Mad Meg, » the strange creature in the center, draped in a red cloak, could very well be Cardinal Granvelle himself.
As Spaepen reminds us, Granvelle had just established a vast network of informants to hunt down heretics « even in the toilets. »
This targeted all those—Lutherans, Calvinists, Erasmians, or Anabaptists—who challenged the predatory grip of the regime. And yet, the money « shat out » by Granvelle is being recovered by women ready to plunder hell! Bruegel, not exactly kind to Mad Meg (Marguerite of Parma), could therefore be expressing his horror at this regent who has lost her mind, and especially at the idea that Flemish women, who had become so free and educated, could end up as informers for a totalitarian regime!
Familia Caritatis
Spaepen (p. 194) documents the strong influence exerted on Bruegel (who was not necessarily a member of the group) by the Familia Caritatis (Family of Charity), a philosophical and religious movement founded and led by Hendrik Niclaes (1502-1570), a prophetic and charismatic figure advocating peace and tolerance about whom little is known but who undoubtedly appeared to many, without reaching his wisdom and erudition, as a kind of successor to Erasmus.
Many humanists and a number of Bruegel’s acquaintances were in contact with this movement which, passing through England, would dissolve into the Quaker revolt against the Anglican Church.2
Plantin, considered the official printer of the Spanish regime, had the Familia Caritatis booklets (deemed heretical by the regime) printed (at night), with initial financial assistance for his printing press from Niclaes, himself a merchant. Niclaes’s major work, Terra Pacis, denounces the « Blind leading the Blind, » a theme also found in the work of Quinten Matsys‘s son (who fled the persecution), and later in Bruegel.
Niclaes draws upon Socrates and the philosophy of the Brethren of the Common Life , for whom selfless love (agape or caritas) should be the driving force of humankind. Another conviction he holds is that life is « a pilgrimage of the soul. »
As in the landscapes of Joachim Patinir, Homo Viator must constantly detach himself from earthly matters and move on. Through his free he must seek union with God by resisting earthly temptations. Inner peace—with oneself, with one’s conscience, and with the divine will—is the foundation of peace on Earth, an ideal that also clearly inspired the painter.
This is the true story, that of a great political commentator and resistance fighter of his time, a painter intellectually and spiritually committed to peace.
NOTES:
- See on this subject Myriam Greilsammer, L’envers du tableau : Mariage et maternité en Flandre médiévale , Armand Colin, 1990, as well as this author’s article on the Landjuweel. ↩︎
- These included the printers Christoffel Plantin and John Gailliart; the humanists Abraham Ortelius, Justus Lipsius, Andreas Masius, Goropius Becanus, and Benito Arias Montano; the poets Peeter Heyns, Jan van der Noot, Lucas d’Heere, Filips Galle, and Joris Hoefnagel; the theologian Hubert Duifhuis; the writer Dirck Volkertsz; Coornhert (right-hand man of William the Silent); the « familists » Daniel van Bombergen, Emanuel van Meteren, and Johan Radermacher; and the Antwerp merchants Marcus Perez and Ferdinando Ximines. ↩︎