Fortune Teller with Soldiers
When you view art, you are not just viewing a painting or photograph or sculpture. What you are truly looking at is a story. That story is usually about the artist themselves. In that story, the artist could be rebelling against social norms, fighting a political battle or fighting in a religious war. It is the job of the person viewing the work to learn the story and to understand that story. In Valentin de Boulogne’s painting “Fortune Teller with Soldiers” you will find more than just one story being told, in fact there are two stories being told and both center around the Fortune Teller herself. In the first story, we are learning of the potential fate of the soldiers and in the second we see a story unraveling with the pickpocket and child. It is the second story that I am most concerned with, for that has to do with my material culture object, the basket. To understand how the stories all come together and are woven together like the basket, an understanding is needed for the history and possible motivation behind Valentin’s decision to paint this particular painting.
According Jean-Paul Cuzin on Grove Art, Valentin was the son of a painter and glassworker whose family had lived in Coulommiers, France since at least 1489. The family name appears to originate from Boulogne-sur-Mer, a city in Northern France in the colony of Pas-de Calais. There is confusion about Valentin’s date of birth, as his death certificate from 1632 says that he died at age 38, unfortunately Valentin’s baptismal record has been lost, though scholars’ treat his date of birth as January 3, 1591. It can be presumed that Valentin would have first started painting in his father’s studio prior to moving to Paris or Fontainebleau, and before leaving for Italy. The first specific mention of Valentin’s being there in Italy is in the stati d’anime for 1620, when he was living in the parish of S Maria del Popolo. Prior to that date it can only be speculated on his whereabouts and activities. The major question Cuzin rises, which is left unanswered, is the date of Valentin’s earliest piece of work, which was possibly painted around 1615 or even earlier.
While studying in Italy, Valentin was under the influence of Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio and Bartolomeo Manfredi, while studying under Simon Vouet. Who Valentin idolized and who he worked on, shows repeatedly in his own work. Caravaggio, an Italian painter, whose early career as a painter focused on portraits and still-life, is best known for becoming this influential religious painter. According to John Gash from Grove Art, when it came to Caravaggio’s style, he used a “bold, naturalistic style, which emphasized the common humanity of the apostles and martyrs, flattered the aspirations of the Counter-Reformation Church, while his vivid chiaroscuro enhanced both three-dimensionality and drama, as well as evoking the mystery of the faith.” Gash goes on to say that Caravaggio “followed a militantly realist agenda, rejecting both Mannerism and the classicizing naturalism” and “in the first 30 years of the 17th century his naturalistic ambitions and revolutionary artistic procedures attracted a large following from all over Europe.” Several centuries later, Caravaggio is still studied with the same awe he invoked so long ago. While Caravaggio was not the only painter Valentin looked to, another was Bartolomeo Manfredi.
Manfredi was another Italian painter, who in the 17th century was known throughout Italy and beyond as Caravaggio’s closest follower with his works being highly prized and widely collected. “More than simply aping Caravaggio’s style, Manfredi reinterpreted his subjects and rendered new ones, drawing upon Caravaggio’s naturalism and dramatic use of chiaroscuro,” wrote John Chvostal for Grove Art. His paintings were often praised by his contemporaries as equal to Caravaggio’s and he was later emulated and imitated by other Roman Caravaggisti during the 1610s and 1620s. Manfredi never inscribed his paintings and by the 18th century his works were forgotten or confused with those of Caravaggio himself. Efforts to identify his pictures have proven complex and Chvostal cites that it is “difficult, if not impossible, to construct a strict chronology for his [Manfredi’s] paintings, although his general development is distinguished by a progression away from Caravaggio’s artistic ideals towards a more personal artistic conception.” In Manfredi’s later period he would adopt a common theme from Caravaggio, scenes taking place in taverns, dramatically lit canvases with a penchant for portraying ordinary people, even religious subjects, and Manfredi would paint his figures large, and close to the surface of the picture to involve the viewers in the action.
While Caravaggio and Manfredi may have influenced the style and themes that would become common in Valentin’s work. It was Simon Vouet, a Frenchman like Valentin, who he would study under at his shop. In his time, Vouet was considered a leading French painter, today he is now known more for his influence on French painting than for his works. Vouet’s earliest work show the influence of Caravaggio, where he was part of the movement. According to Barbara Brejon at Grove Art, “Vouet would use the dramatic contrasts of light, the restricted palette of blacks, browns whites, the realistic anatomical studies drawn from life and the lack of any attempt to achieve a decorative layout were part of the study of Caravaggio.” What this shows is that the influence brought on by Caravaggio was felt far and used by many.
In the case of Valentin, his work also emulated Caravaggio and in an ironic way, his own life. Valentin was had success with a type of composition invented by Caravaggio where fortune tellers, drinkers, or gamblers are grouped around a table. At the same time, Valentin himself was fond of carousing and fine wine, he lived and died in the self-indulgent world he painted. It is thought that Valentin died from a chill caught after bathing in a fountain following an evening of smoking and drinking. It is a sad end to a life that could have continued to offer so much. His surviving body of work is made up of around seventy-five paintings. Cuzin feels that “the documented paintings from the last five years of Valentin’s life allow an accurate definition of his style at a time when he was placing increasing importance on the psychological relationships between the figures in his works.” It is in my opinion that Valentin’s genius shows in the subtleness of psychological expression and interplay among his characters, as well as in the refinement and finesse of his painting technique.
One of Valentin’s greatest pieces of work, one that used the psychology, interplay among characters, and involves the viewer in the painting is “Fortune Teller with Soldiers.” The first thing anyone can say about the painting is that it can be read either starting on the left or right hand side and be able to tell the story. If starting from the viewer’s right, when viewing the painting and what it appears to be depicting, the first thing to take note of location of hands and secondly the eyes. At the table, a young soldier is mesmerized by the fortune teller who is reading his palm. He, two of his comrades, and the man pouring the wine are visually hanging on her every word. Valentin has placed one soldier with his back to us, right at the picture’s surface, this encourages the viewer to want to peer around him and see for ourselves what is going on. Now go the viewer’s left side, and it is revealed that fortune telling is not the only con game going on. To the left of the gypsy a figure is cloaked in the shadows looking out at us, and he raises a finger to his lips, as if to shush us. Its meaning is perfectly clear when you look for his other hand and see that he is in the process of stealing the fortune teller’s purse from her pocket. Only he is not the only other thief in this picture, in the lower half of the painting, a small child is seen returning the favor by picking his pockets. The visual lesson being taught in the painting is one of many, while one person’s fortune is told, another’s is being stolen; and one thief falls victim to another. Now returning to the viewer’s right side of the painting and all that wondering why the lone soldier is staring out at us, it is a knowing stare. Perhaps he is thinking that this is what life is like. Or maybe the figure who sits with his back to us should look over his shoulder to see what we are up to. Or maybe we all should look over our own shoulders from time to time. This psychological painting with the interplay among the characters, has now involved us.
This is just a visual interpretation of the “Fortune Teller with Soldiers,” a more secretive telling of the painting deals with the material object of the basket and snare sitting at the fortune teller’s feet. This leads to my argument that the fortune teller is really the Virgin Mary setting a trap for the pickpocketer, also known as the Devil. First the basket, from the Jerusalem Bible, “Acts 9:25, the baskets were large, such as the one in which Saul escaped over the wall at Damascus.” It symbolized escape, the hand basket also suggests a strong associated with going to Hell, as the vehicle which transports the soul. The snare behind the basket is a symbol for wickedness and of death. Something that is likely to lure or tempt someone into harm or error, for example the wickedness and snares of the Devil. The questions lies, is the basket a symbol for the devil to escape into and the snare is there to stop him, or is the snare their to lure and then capture him in his wickedness and then the basket is a symbol to send him back to hell; as the expression suggests, Hell in a hand basket. For someone to be pure enough to lure the devil, would they not need to be also holy? And for someone to be powerful enough to trap the devil, would they not need to be holy?
I put forth that the fortune teller is the Virgin Mary. With the help of W.E. Post’s website of Religion Facts, Mr. Post is has recently returned to graduate school to pursue his Doctorial in Religious Studies, I have been able to pull things from the painting and compare them with his findings. For starters the colors she is wearing are considered liturgical colors. Liturgical colors are colors of vestments and church decorations within a Christian liturgy. The symbolism of purple, white, green, red, gold, black, and rose may serve to underline moods appropriate to a season of the liturgical year or may highlight a special occasion. This women is wearing red, blue, and white. Red is symbolizes fire and blood, and is worn at Pentecost to remind the faithful of the tongues of fire which descended on the apostles. Blue is a color associated with the Virgin Mary and is worn for the feast of the Immaculate Conception. This dark blue mantle, that the fortune teller is wearing, was common for Mary to be painted in, it is from Byzantine origin and is the color of an empress. Finally the white symbolizing purity, holiness, joy, innocence and triumph. Next a razor sharp eye is needed, the fortune teller is wearing a sash. The sash is a typical attribute of the virgin in the temple and symbolizes Mary’s chastity and exclusive dedication later on to God. It cannot be seen where the sash is knotted, but if the sash is knotted in front it represents a special attribute to her virginity; it has also been used to visualize her maternity. It can be seen in the painting that the sash is not black, if it had been black that would identify Mary as the future mother. This then leads me to believe that the small child in the painting is thus Jesus himself. At the top of the fortune teller’s shoulder, we see her garments are knotted together. To have knots in one’s garments keeps danger at bay, this is what Mary would need to have the devil so close to her now. This knot suggests to me that Mary is wearing half a mantle, which the color would suggest to me that nobility and an elevated state. This color is also an anticipation of suffering and passion. That would fit if the fortune teller has just given that young soldier some bad news about the upcoming war.
With the help of Doug Gray’s website of Christian Symbolism and Their Meanings, I have been able to pull things from the painting with his findings. I start with the soldiers, they carry swords which can be viewed simply as weapons of destruction. They symbolize the archetypal male with passion, power and dominance- aggression, which properly channeled, propels human endeavor. They are a compulsive, ever moving force. The dark, primitive expression of this force is destruction, violent, frustration, and ill will. You have one man powering a glass of wine, which can be viewed as the feminine suits, symbols of feminine traits by being nurturing, receptive and welcoming when correctly used; cruel, lazy, and cold when abused. The masculine power seeks knowledge and progress, the feminine provides restraining wisdom, guidance, and grounding. Where the masculine moves and expands, the feminine forms, shapes, and contains. But what is the man pouring, does the wine symbolize simply nourishment to quench thirst or is that a symbol of the Eucharist, as the blood of Christ. And if so, is does that explain just who the small child is in the lower left side of the painting? I believe so, because it could only be Jesus, the son of God, who would be both powerful and pure enough to send the devil back to hell.
The new question is why would Valentin choose such a topic to pain? I believe that answer lies in the history of the period. Valentin painted “Fortune Teller with Soldiers” in 1620. Prior to that, going back as far as his childhood in France, there was a start to the unraveling of religion and religious wars. Valentin was born at the end of the 15th century and that was the start of what is known historically as Early Modern France and lasts until the eve of the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. During this period France will evolve from a feudal country to a centralized state, organized around a powerful absolute monarchy which relies on the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings and the explicit support of the established Roman Catholic Church. The doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings states that a monarch owed his rule to the will of God, not to the will of his subjects, parliament, the aristocracy or any other competing authority. Any attempt to depose a monarch or to restrict his powers ran contrary to the will of God.
Besides being known as Early Modern France, the period is also known as the period of the Bourbon Dynasty. This was a period of importance in the European Royal Houses (Jones 136). Bourbon kings first ruled Navarre and France in the 16th century and by the 18th century, members of the Bourbon dynasty would also hold thrones in Spain and southern Italy while other Bourbons would hold important duchies. Today the Royal Family of Spain is descended from the Bourbon monarch of France. The Bourbon family was a noble family dating back to the beginning of the 13th century, when the estate of Bourbon was ruled by a Lord who was a vassal of the King of France. In 1268, Robert, Count of Clermont, sixth son of King Louis IX of France married Beatrice of Burgundy, heiress to the lordship of Bourbon. Their son Louis was made Duke of Bourbon in 1327. While the senior line of his heirs was dispossessed of the dukedom in 1523, because of the treason of Duke Charles III, the junior line of La Marche-Vendôme acquired the Dukedom of Vendôme. The Bourbon-Vendôme branch became the ruling house first of the tiny remnant of the Kingdom of Navarre on the northern side of the Pyrenees in 1555, and then of France in 1589, with Henry III of Navarre becoming Henry IV of France (Jones 114).
It was during this time that the French Wars of Religion started with a series of conflicts between the Catholics and Protestants. The first of the French Wars of Religion started in the middle of the sixteenth century in 1562, to the end of the sixteenth century with the assassinations of both Henry of Guise in 1588, and Henry III in 1589, who was the son of King Henry II (Jones 143). The Wars included civil infighting as well as the military operations. With the death of Henry III, the new Protestant King was Henry IV, his eventual leaving of Protestantism in 1593, his acceptance by most of the Catholic establishment in 1594, to his being accepted by the Pope in 1595, and his signing of the Edict of Nantes in 1598, which guaranteed freedom of private worship and civil equality, that would end the wars of religion in 1598. Valentin would see the outcome of the wars, but he would surely feel the after effects of them. There is no suggestion or evidence that Valentin was either a Catholic, Protestant or even an Atheist. His painting of “Fortune Teller with Soldiers” does suggest that no matter Valentin’s religious beliefs, he feels them strongly and is not arguing against Catholicism or Protestants. It could be argued that Valentin would be a deeply religious man for his kind portrayal of Mary as the Fortune Teller.
Traditionally, France has been viewed as a Roman Catholic country, and had been up until the 1970s until France became a secular country. Though public holidays are still largely Catholic holidays. Freedom of religion is a constitutional right in France and today the government does not keep statistical records on the countries religion. A law passed in 1905 the Law of Separation of Church and State, and implies that the government and government institutions, like schools, should not endorse any particular religion or intervene in religious dogma, and that religions should refrain from intervening in policy-making. The French do maintain a strong gap between civilian life and religion. With religion considered a practice as private as possible, and it is considered offensively inquisitive to enter religious discussions in most contexts.
When Valentin was painting, he saw the start of the French Renaissance, which was from the late 15th century to the early 17th century. The French Renaissance traditionally extends from the French invasion of Italy in 1494 during the reign of Charles VIII until the death of Henri IV in 1610 (Jones 128). During this period was the beginning of the absolutism in France, the spread of humanism, the early exploration of the “New World,” the importing of goods, and the development of new techniques and artistic forms in the fields of printing, architecture, painting, sculpture, music, the sciences and vernacular literature. Along with the elaboration of new codes of sociability, etiquette and discourse. France was emerging form the Middle Ages and marching boldly into a new age. Their art work was active with themes and symbolism. The works of art from this period features mainly religious themes, largely due to the Church as the main client of artists, but also some purely figurative themes.
Valentin de Boulogne reveals all of this in his painting the “Fortune Teller with Soldiers.” With so many ways to interpret the work and views one can take and argue for or against in their approach, it is hard to say that any one person is correct. I believe in my heart of hearts that the fortune teller is indeed the Virgin Mary, that she is luring the Devil into a trap and with the help of Jesus, the devil will be cast to hell in the basket. It is Jesus, our savior that will lead us to redemption, wash us of our sins, and give his life to save ours. This is the meaning that I will take away, with the knowledge that Valentin was born into the period directly after the French Wars of Religion and experience the results from that. From there, Valentin would go to Rome and make his life’s work by painting religious themed works. Valentin wants us to know that we can be saved, even if he could not from his own demons of taverns, fine wine, and the self-indulgent world he painted.
bravenet.com