Rubens & Consequences of War- Rayne Rutherford
In 1638, Peter Paul Rubens was commissioned by the Grand Duke of Tuscany to paint anything he desired. Peter Rubens, a highly sought-after artist as well as a passionate diplomat, decided to paint The Consequences of War, also known as Horrors of War, a call for peace in the turbulent and horrific times for Europe during the Thirty Years’ War. The Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) was known as one of Europe’s most destructive and ravaging wars, as 4.5-8 million soldiers and civilians died during the timespan, leaving a wake of calamity, famine, and disease. The Thirty Years War’s origins are complex, but the overarching rationale was the growing tensions between Protestant and Catholic regions combined with the struggle for political power. Ruben’s painting, The Consequences of War, was a direct depiction of the violence and massacre during the Thirty Years’ War that had harshly affected Europe and its constituents. Ruben was a foreign diplomat, often visiting other countries’ monarchs in his position as court painter. There he would lobby for peace among the nation’s rulers not only through tongue but through brush strokes, serving a wide range of rulers such as the dukes of Mantua, King Phillip IV, Charles I, and Marie de' Medici. Ruben played a role in the exploration of peace not only through artistic representation but truly as an envoy of peace.
After our class discussed Goya’s Disasters of War series, I became interested in nontraditional paintings and depictions of wartime. In Goya’s time, it was not common to see the barbaric sides of war depicted in paintings; the typical war painting was a depiction of a respected general ready to pounce, most likely sabre in hand on horseback, or a thematic peace riddled with symbolism, similar to The Consequences of War. Goya, on the other hand, revealed the truth about wars and focused the spotlight on civilian casualties and gruesome attacks rather than the heroic actions of generals and commanders. Thus naming Goya the precursor for realistic paintings of war. Goya’s somewhat alarming artistic style captivates its viewers through shock and unbridled truth, while Rubens’ style is appealing and allegorical to its core. They both describe war and its effects on others, but through vastly different means and appeals.
In my search for unique and symbolic paintings of war and its effects, I found The Consequences of War by Peter Paul Rubens. The Consequences of War uses Roman mythology and visual symbolism to demonstrate the gruesome effects of war on not only the citizens but the overall health of the country. We define war often in terms of the soldier and citizen perspective, even on occasion through political power, but Rubens depicts the actions of war and their effect on the community, country, and nation as a whole. Rubens speaks less of the tragedies of death but of the tragedies of a failing and halted society. Rubens solely uses allegories to represent his point through references in his art such as biblical imagery, Roman mythology, and symbolism.
The details, which I particularly enjoy, are how Peter Ruben illustrates an entire war in one singular photo. The connections with Roman mythology allow each character to hold deeper meaning with their presence. As the main focal point in the painting, the partially clothed woman, Venus Goddess of Love, is pulling on a man encased with armor and a red cloak, Mars God of War, while another woman with a torch, Fury Alekto, incarnation of anger, is pulling Mars away from Venus. With this depiction and insight alone, we can tell that Ruben illustrates the brutality of the continuation of war, fueled by anger and passion; in contrast, love and compassion try to defuse the situation.
As Mars is being pulled by both emotions, he is stepping on a pile of books and artwork. While in the havoc of the situation, both Harmony, the woman holding the lute, and an architect, the man at the bottom, right with architectural instruments, fall to the ground, dropping and breaking their items. Through the chaos of the situation, Ruben highlights these small details in telling the far-reaching effects of war on nations as a whole. The degrading of books and artwork represents the arts and humanities are lost in the focal point of wartime. Harmony’s lute breaking by the impact of war represents the discord and fragility of all things during the war, while the architect’s tools break, reflecting the truth that the normality in war is to destroy, never create.
These details don’t cast a spotlight on a specific incident in history but rather on the whole process and tragedies of war for all countries. I enjoy the large-scale symbolism and believe it fits into the depiction of “What War Is,” but in a larger, more fundamental view.
