Pieter Bruegel the Elder is best known for scenes of
everyday life and he can be regarded as the first well-known exponent of genre
painting. The Fall of the Rebel Angels shows a quite different topic:
the expulsion of Lucifer from Heaven by St Michael and a group of angels loyal
to God. Bruegel shows us St Michael (with his shield bearing the cross of the
resurrection), but it is difficult to make out Lucifer in his many-headed form.
Heavenly light shines from the top of the picture, through the blue sky, and we
then move down to the darkness of the abyss of Hell. Some animals are present
in the sky, together with angels, and most are descending into Hell, which is not
fiery, as it is described in The Holy Bible and as it is usually shown in paintings.
The only hint of fire in Bruegel’s work turns out to be a feathery headdress.
An excellent commentary on the painting has been provided by
the Royal Museums of Fine Art in Brussels, where the painting is exhibited [1].
As mentioned in this commentary, several of the animals shown are based on
those from collections of curiosities, which were becoming popular as sources
of wonder at the unfamiliar.
I would like to make some additional comments on some of the
animals shown in the painting.
The puffer fish
Bruegel shows a puffer fish with the body distended. One
defence mechanism used by these fish is to rapidly take water into the stomach
to “inflate” the body and make spines stand out: the same mechanism is used
when the fish gulp air should they be caught out of the water. In this state,
puffer fish have been preserved by drying and it is likely that Bruegel saw a
preserved specimen displayed in a collection of curiosities. While the eyes
look unnatural, he shows the fused teeth that are used by the living fish to bite
into their prey [2].
Interestingly, some puffer fish have another defence mechanism
in the production of chemicals within the liver that are highly toxic to
humans. So much so, that raw fugu – a delicacy in some parts of the world –
requires preparation by specially-trained chefs. It tempts us to think that the
inflation of the body, and the production of toxins, evolved to prevent
predation by humans, but both must have existed long before the evolution of humans.
Two dead fish and bloated frogs
The fish are shown with their mouths open as if gasping, an
indication of distress that Bruegel clearly wished to convey. The same
intention of providing images that cause us to become frightened comes in the
bloated frog, whether bloating was caused by decomposition or, should the frog
be female, by being filled with eggs that will now not be laid. A second frog-like
creature is shown with the abdomen split open to show what appears to be spawn,
but this animal is different to Bruegel’s frog (having what looks like the “parson’s
nose” of a chicken at the end of the abdomen). I have no idea what Bruegel was
trying to show here.
Mussels + a crustacean
In this image we see two open mussel shells containing the
body of each mollusc. The two mussels, each shown inside one of their shell
valves, have clearly been cooked as, in life, the mantle (the pink/yellow fold)
is closely applied to the shell for almost all of its length. Lying between the
two mussels is what appears to be a crustacean, blue in colour like a lobster
when alive, and the whole reminds us of a flying creature, with the mussel shells forming
“wings”.
The stenogastrine wasp
Although stylised, the stenogastrine wasp is probably included
as a threat and also as a bizarre creature that would also have occurred in a collection
of curiosities. These wasps, like other social insects, are likely to be female
and possessed of a mild sting. However, they are not usually aggressive and
their appearance more frightening than reality, especially when shown at such a
large size relative to other recognisable animals in the painting.
The falling birds
Two birds are shown falling into the abyss. One appears to be laying an egg, but it is impossible to identify what type of bird
it might be: the other resembles a great auk, now extinct.
Interestingly, Ole Worm (1588-1654), the Danish natural historian and physician,
kept a great auk as a pet and, after its death and preservation, it might have
found its way into his splendid cabinet of curiosities [3].
We can spend much time in speculating on what Bruegel intended
in his use of images of animals, both real and imaginary. His view of the expulsion
of Lucifer is certainly unique and is based on his imagination, with no attempt
made to show the realistic scale of the different components. Dead terrestrial
and aquatic animals are present in all parts of the painting, together with images
that are supernatural and were likely to have been strongly influenced by the
earlier works of Hieronymus Bosch (as mentioned in the commentary).
It is an extraordinary painting.
[2] https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2017/may/pufferfish-beak-originates-from-stem-cell-tweak.html
No comments:
Post a Comment