Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Schouman the naturalist: Fine feathers make fine birds? Examining a painted canvas from a biological point of view
by S.J. van Ettinger
1. Introduction
1.1 Research question
During a visit to the Château de Chenonceau
(Chenonceaux, Indre-et-Loire, France) I stumbled
upon a painting by the Dutch painter Aart
Schouman (1710-1792)(Figure 1; Figure 2). The
undated painting was simply entitled as “painted
canvas” and was on display on the first floor at the
Galerie Médicis, together with another painting by
Schouman. At first sight it caught my attention
because of the seemingly Dutch landscape and a
skilful depiction of its flora and fauna. However, a
closer look at the displayed bird species got me
slightly confused. Schouman’s composition
consists of a variety of common Dutch wetland
birds, but also includes species that are considered
rare nowadays.
This gives rise to the following question: How was
Schouman able to display rare bird species in his
painting; did Schouman observe his objects in their
natural environment?
1.2 Hypotheses
Several scenarios seem possible:
a) Since biodiversity and the abundance of different (bird) species is changing over time, it is
imaginable that all depicted bird species used to be relatively common in the Netherlands
during the 18th century, enabling Schouman to easily observe and illustrate the displayed bird
species. Whether Schouman painted based upon his own observations will be investigated by
analysing the visual elements of the painting.
b) In case some of the displayed bird species also used to be rare in the 18th century, there is a
possibility that Schouman was actively looking for extraordinary bird species to portray. It
could even be that Schouman did not observe the rare bird species in the Netherlands, but
went abroad to observe species that were uncommon in the Netherlands.
c) Another possibility is that Schouman used external sources, such as paintings of others, to
realize his composition. This scenario is interesting since it might reveal that his “naturalist”
elements may to a certain extent be “artificial”. If Schouman used external sources, it is
interesting to know what sources he used and how he obtained them.
Fig. 1: Aart Schouman, self-portrait (1730)
Source: http://www.rijksmuseum.nl
Fig. 2: Painted canvas by Aart Schouman, naturalist Dutch painter (1710-1792). On display at the Château de Chenonceau (Chenonceaux, Indre-et-Loire, France), July 2015.
2. Visual analysis
2.1 Landscape
The painting displays a wetland with vegetation and different bird species. Among the plant species
are Yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus), presumably an (English) oak tree (Quercus robur) with its gnarly
branches and shrivelled brownish leaves and a pollard willow (Salix spp.)(Figure 3). The fact that
Yellow flag is in bloom (May-July)1 and most plants have green leaves suggest that the background
displays a wetland in late spring.
The presence of Yellow flag and, in particular the presence of a pollard willow reinforces the
assumption that Schouman displays a Dutch wetland. Back in the days, willow fields were common in
the Netherlands, mainly in the province of South-Holland and near the Biesbosch. Pollarding willows
encouraged the growth of branches, which were commercially used by industries such as basket- and
broom making and for the construction of wattle panels up until the 20th century.
Schouman was born on the 4th of March in 1710 in Dordrecht (South-Holland, the Netherlands), a
town situated next to the Biesbosch, but mainly lived in the Hague2. However, he regularly visited his
hometown2, which increases the likelihood that Schouman observed and painted a representation of a
Dutch wetland with willows, presumably in the vicinity of Dordrecht. It is possible that the background
portrays an actual landscape of the Biesbosch in the 18th century, as seen through Schouman’s eyes.
Fig. 3: Photo comparison of plant species.
Yellow flag (Gele lis, Iris pseudacorus)
Credit: Jorg Hempel
English oak (Zomereik, Quercus robur)
Credit: Sander van der Molen
Pollard willow (Knotwilg, Salix spp.)
Credit: Brabants Landschap
2.2 Composition of birds
Schouman displays eleven different bird species. Most species can be named with great certainty
(Figure 4). For each species, credits and distribution maps are included in the appendix (Appendix
Figure 1-11). Only the depiction of a Coot (Fulica atra) is open for debate. To my knowledge
Schouman displays a juvenile individual, but his depiction also resembles a juvenile Common
moorhen (Gallinula chloropus). However, the latter should show white undertail coverts.
Fig. 4: List of portrayed bird species and their current occurrence in the Netherlands.
Species (scientific) Mainly observable during Current rarity
1. Hooded crow (Corvus cornix) Winter Rare
2. Eurasian hoopoe (Upupa epops) Spring, summer Rare
3. Bearded reedling (Panurus biarmicus) Autumn Relatively common
4. Eurasian teal (Anas crecca) Winter Common
5. Eurasian oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus) Year-round Common
6. Greater white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons) Winter Common
7. Smew (Mergellus albellus) Winter Relatively common
8. Common shelduck (Tadorna tadorna) Year-round Common
9. Coot (Fulica atra) Year-round Common
10.Mute swan (Cygnus olor) Year-round Common
11. Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) Summer Rare
Contrary to the arrangement of plant species, Schouman’s composition of birds tells us that it is
unlikely that he observed all bird species at the same time, or even during the same season. Some
depicted species only reside in the Netherlands during the winter months whereas others only pass by
during summer. There is no reason to assume that bird migration or migration pathways changed that
drastically over the course of time that Schouman encountered a, for instance, Smew (Mergellus
albellus) in late spring. The background with its vegetation might be a snapshot of a Dutch wetland
during late spring, but we may now conclude that the bird species are clearly composed and not based
on a late spring stroll through Dutch nature.
But then again, could it be that Schouman observed the birds, including nowadays’ rare bird species,
throughout the year because they used to be relatively common in the 18th century? In the upcoming
section the presence of the Hooded crow (Corvus cornix), Eurasian hoopoe (Upupa epops) and Black-
crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) during the 18th
century will be examined.
2.3 Occurrence during the 18th century
2.3.1 Hooded crow
The first written record of a Hooded crow (Corvus cornix) in the Netherlands is from Cornelis Jacobsz
van Heenvliet, who describes an individual flying over the Haarlemmertrekvaart (Noordwijk, South-
Holland) on the 10th of October 1635.
3
The hooded crow is likely to be a common sight during the (late) 18th century.
4 During winter nights,
they were known to reside on barn roofs. Besides, they used to breed near farms during summer,
although Nozeman’s wording could suggest that this phenomenon was less common. However, it did
cause an unpleasant relationship with farmers since the Hooded crow would eat seeds from freshly
sown fields. Therefore, nests were destroyed and removed.4 Even during the 19
th- and early 20
th
century the Hooded crow was a common visitor during winters, but quickly the population would
experience a downfall from the 50’s onwards.5
2.3.2 Eurasian hoopoe
According to Boele & van Winden (2001) the Eurasian hoopoe (Upupa epops) was presumably
breeding regularly in the Netherlands during the Middle Ages, but no further details are provided.6
However, it is known that the Hoopoe is an iconic bird in the Medieval bestiary tradition. The bird is
mainly associated with filth and foul habits, since it was said to collect human dung and builds its nest
with it, and eats bad smelling excrement. Besides, the Hoopoe is associated with the moral that
children should care for their aging parents, as their parents cared for them.7,8
Birkhead’s “The
Wisdom of Birds” also contains an image of the Eurasian hoopoe with a caption of the thirteen century
German polymath and cleric Albert the Great.9 He described the bird as “a familiar bird…” which
makes it likely that the bird was indeed relatively common during the Middle Ages in Western Europe.
Fortunately, the 18th century Dutch churchman and naturalist Cornelis Nozeman (1720-1786)
mentions that, although an uncommon sight, he observed Eurasian hoopoes multiple times during the
springs of 1745-1747 when he visited several towns located near the dunes of North-Holland.10
He
presumed those were breeding, which could indicate commonness. In July of 1778 he provides us
with the first written record of breeding Hoopoes in Rotterdam (South-Holland).10
This sighting tells us
that the Eurasian hoopoe was also present in South-Holland during the 18th century. Besides,
Nozeman is able to describe the bird in great detail. Together with his statement on the content of the
bird’s stomach (maggots and beetles) it is clear that this bird was profoundly examined.
2.3.3. Black-crowned night heron
The Black-crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) was presumably relatively common and bred in
Dutch river- and marshlands during the 17th
and 18th century.
10 The birds were known to return to their
breeding places year by year and there is no mention of the bird being uncommon or rare during the
18th century. This changed over the course of time. A variety of newspapers report a Nachtreiger
(translation: Night heron) near Zwolle (Overijssel) during the winter of 1838.11
The weakened bird was
caught and ultimately died. The bird was described as uncommon, hence the publicity. However, the
Black-crowned night heron was known to be breeding in the Netherlands. By the end of the 19th
century the last breeding colony disappeared due to the drainage of marshlands and the collecting of
eggs.12
2.3.4 Closure
Although written records of bird sightings or population trends are scarce, I carefully dare to conclude
that the Hooded crow (Corvus cornix), Eurasian hoopoe (Upupa epops) and the Black-crowned night
heron were all more common during the 18th century than during the 21
st century.
Nowadays, the sightings of rare bird species are being shared among birders, enabling them to get a
glimpse of the exotic appearances. Also, birding is more common and not only reserved for the elites.
Advanced optics can be purchased by the mass and information on birds is profound and easily
accessible. As a fact, the main online hub of Dutch nature sightings now has over 14.000 active
members (2014).13
Therefore, the fact that back in the days some people were still able to fortunately
run into these bird species seems like an argument to carefully deduce that the described species
were relatively common.
Knowing that Schouman could have observed the bird species in the Netherlands during the 18th
century, which is in accordance with our first hypothesis, we still don’t know whether Schouman really
observed the birds in their natural surroundings. Was Schouman a true naturalist, who observed and
portrayed species in the most natural way possible?
2.4 Schouman as an observer
Schouman is honoured for his lively display of birds in their natural surroundings14
, but as a biologist I
partly disagree. Although the birds appear lively and the surroundings look natural, the relation
between the birds and the vegetation often seems lost. For instance, as the name suggests one would
most likely encounter the nervous Bearded reedlings (Panurus biarmicus) performing aerial acrobatics
in the reed and not sitting on a branch. Furthermore, the Smew (Mergellus albellus) would be more
likely to be situated in the water. Also, if we analyse another work of Schouman (Figure 5), we do not
only notice that Schouman portrays an exotic canary with a native bird (Ring ouzel, Turdus torquatus),
but also that the Ring ouzel’s neck is strangely bended. Naturally, there is a much greater chance that
one would observe the bird upright.
Therefore, his observational flaws forces us to believe that his depictions of Dutch birds in the
discussed painting (Figure 2), although it’s likely that they were common enough to be observed in
nature, were studied elsewhere and later added to the background of late spring vegetation.
Fig. 5: Schouman’s “Een Canarie Vogel en Ring leijster. Levensgroot” in comparison with a
contemporary picture of a Ring ouzel (Turdus torquatus). Photo credit: Gabriel Buissart
3. Aart Schouman
3.1 Life history
Schouman was born in Dordrecht (1710), but lived in the Hague from 1748-1792. He served as an
apprentice to the Dordrecht painter Adriaan van der Burg when he was 15 years old. Initially,
Schouman was producing portraits, but he soon became a jack-of-all-trades who produces everything
from painted-wall hangings, to glass engravings, mythological and biblical paintings and reproductions
of the old masters.2,15
Later, he also painted decorative compositions with birds, rare animals and
plants. Schouman became especially known because of his aquarelles of exotic birds. In order to
produce his naturalist paintings, Schouman studied nature, as well as the oeuvres of Jan Weenix
(1640-1641) and Melchior d’ Hondecoeter (c. 1636–1695).14
Strong resemblances are observable.
3.2 Inspiration
Schouman was privileged by regent Willem V to observe and
illustrate exotic species in the royal menagerie, het klein Loo
near the Hague. Together with others Schouman’s illustrations
contributed to Vosmaer’s “Regnum animale”.16
Cornelius Nozeman describes that he witnessed the arrival of
a Black-crowned night heron at a menagerie in 1769 10
, after
the bird got accidentally trapped in fishing-gear. Unfortunately,
he did not explicitly describe whether it concerned the royal
menagerie near the Hague. However, Nozeman did collect
species for the collection of Anna van Hannover, spouse of
Willem IV.17
This collection was started in 1751 and ultimately
became the royal collection of Willem V.
Schouman was not only able to work in the menagerie, but
also to examine stuffed specimens of Willem V’s royal
collection.14
Therefore, there is a fair chance that the bird
described and witnessed by Nozeman is depicted on
Schouman’s painting. If this is the case, Schouman’s painting could be dated post 1769 which is
possible since birds where his main theme during the second half of his life.
Besides, Schouman’s visits to the royal collection could explain why some of Schouman’s portrayed
birds are oddly deformed. As a result of the stuffing process, the birds might get deformed. Maybe this
is why the Ring ouzel’s (Turdus torquatus) neck is portrayed in such an odd way (Figure 5). Another
result of working based on specimens, instead of field sightings, is the previously described missing
link with the bird’s habitat. Taxidermists often mount there specimens on random branches (Figure 6).
This could be the reason that Schouman portrays his Bearded reedlings (Panurus biarmicus) on a
branch instead of in reed vegetation. Furthermore, some of Schouman’s birds are almost identically
portrayed on different paintings which could suggest that they were based on the same mounted
specimen (Figure 7). Notice the hollow wings, downwards pointing tail and twisted position of the
throat. However, caution should be taken since we don’t know exactly what the stuffed animals that
Schouman studied looked like.
Fig. 6: Mounted bearded reedling Photo credit: trusted
Fig. 7: Comparison between Schouman’s “Een bonte kraai ,1752” and the Hooded crow
of the discussed painting. Source: http://www.teylersmuseum.nl
4. Conclusion
No doubt that Schouman studied nature and tried to display it as lively and natural as possible. The
background vegetation is a prime example of his intention, as well as many of his other works.
However, Schouman wouldn’t hesitate to paint a composition of bird species that could not coexist in a
Dutch wetland during a particular season. Also, he displayed several species that are considered rare
nowadays. However, we concluded that the portrayed bird species were likely to be more common
during the 18th century. If we closely observed the portrayed bird species, especially their behaviour
and relationship with the vegetation, it seemed plausible that the discussed painting is to a large
extent based on mounted, or captive animals instead of personal observations of the species in their
natural surroundings. Thus, Schouman could have observed all portrayed bird species, but his visits to
the menagerie and royal collection are likely to be fundamental to Schouman’s illustrations of birds
which were later added to the background of late spring wetland vegetation.
5. References
1. van der Meijden, R. (2005). Heukels’ flora van Nederland.23ste
ed. Groningen/Houten: Noordhoff Uitgevers.
2. Rijksbureau voor kunsthistorische documentatie (2015). Aert Schouman.
Retrieved from: https://rkd.nl/nl/artists/71074
3. Swaen, A.E.H. & van Heenvliet, C.J. (1948). Jacht-bedrijff : naar het handschrift in de Koninklijke Bibliotheek te ’s-Gravenhage. Leiden
: Brill.
4. Nozeman, C., Houttuyn, M. & Sepp, C. (1797). Nederlandsche vogelen dl. III. Amsterdam: J.C Sepp.
5. Zijlstra, M. (2003). Flevoland het laatste bolwerk van de Bonte kraai. Limosa 76(2), p. 49-58.
6. Boele, A. & van Winden, E. (2001) Kleurrijk en exotisch: Hoppen bezoeken Nederland. Sovon-Nieuws 14(1), p. 7-8.
7. Gibs, L. (2003). Online textbook for Medieval Latin.
Retrieved from: http://www.mythfolklore.net/medieval_latin/08_physiologus/supp/hoopoe.htm
8. Badke, D. (2011). The medieval bestiary: animals in the Middle Ages.
Retrieved from: http://bestiary.ca/beasts/beast243.htm
9. Birkhead, T. (2008). The Wisdom of Birds: an illustrated history of ornithology. London: Bloomsbury.
10. Nozeman, C., Houttuyn, M. & Sepp, C. (1786). Nederlandsche vogelen dl. II. Amsterdam: J.C Sepp.
11. Overijsselsche Courant 27-2-1838; Utrechtse Courant 2-3-1838
Dagblad van 's-Gravenhage van 2-3-1838; Vlissingsche Courant 3-3-1838
12. Sovon (2015). Kwak.
Retrieved from: https://www.sovon.nl/nl/soort/1040
13. Waarneming.nl (2015). Statistieken (NL).
Retrieved from: http://waarneming.nl/statistiek.php
14. van Eijnden, R. & van der Willigen, A. (1979). Geschiedenis der vaderlandsche schilderkunst, II. Amsterdam: B.M. Israël.
15. Scheen, P.A. (1981). Lexicon Nederlandse Beeldende Kunstenaars, 1750-1880. P. Scheen (Ed.).
’s Gravenhage: Scheen.
16. Vosmaer, A. (1804). Natuurkundige beschryving eener uitmuntende verzameling van zeldsaame gedierten bestaande in Oost- en
Westindische viervoetige dieren, vogelen en slangen weleer levend voorhanden geweest zynde, buiten Den Haag, op het Kleine Loo
van Z.D.H. den Prins van Oranje-Nassau. Amsterdam: J. B. Elwe.
17. van der Aa, A.J. (1868). Biographisch woordenboek der Nederlanden. Deel 13. Haarlem: J.J. van Brederode.
6. Appendix
1: Hooded crow (Bonte kraai, Corvus cornix)
1a. Photo comparison
Credit: Andreas Trepte
1b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
1c. Current indication
Rarity: Rare Presence: Small numbers reside in the Netherlands during winter, very few during summer. Occasionally breeding.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl
Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
2: Eurasian hoopoe (Hop, Upupa epops)
2a. Photo comparison
Credit: Dûrzan cîrano
2b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
2c. Current indication Rarity: Rare Presence: Migratory bird. Most likely to be observed from April to September. However, very few reside in the Netherlands. Occasionally breeding.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
3: Bearded reedling (Baardmannetje, Panurus biarmicus)
3a. Photo comparison
Credit: Martin Mecnarowski
3b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
3c. Current indication
Rarity: Relatively common Presence: Year round. Mainly observed during autumn. Roaming throughout winter.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
4: Eurasian teal (Wintertaling, Anas crecca)
4a. Photo comparison
Credit: Jes Lu
4b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
4c. Indication
Rarity: Common Presence: Very abundant during winter but, can be observed year round. Rarely breeding in the Netherlands.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
5: Eurasian oystercatcher (Scholekster, Haematopus ostralegus)
5a. Photo comparison
Credit: Andreas Trepte
5b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
5c. Indication
Rarity: Common Presence: Year-round
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
6: Greater white-fronted goose (Kolgans, Anser albifrons)
6a. Photo comparison
Credit: Andreas Trepte
6b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence Source: http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
6c. Indication
Rarity: Common Presence: Very abundant during winter but, can be observed year round. Rarely breeding in the Netherlands
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
7: Smew (Nonnetje, Mergellus albellus)
7a. Photo comparison
Credit: Andreas Trepte
7b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
7c. Indication
Rarity: Relatively common Presence: Migratory bird species present during winter in varying numbers.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
8: Common shelduck (Bergeend, Tadorna tadorna)
8a. Photo comparison
Credit: Dick Daniels
8b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
8c. Indication Rarity: Common Presence: Breeds in the Netherlands. Can be observed year-round.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl
Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
9: (juvenile) Coot (Meerkoet, Fulica atra)
9a. Photo comparison
Credit: Michael Palmer
9b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
9c. Indication
Rarity: Common Presence: Can be observed year round.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl
Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
10: Mute swan (Knobbelzwaan, Cygnus olor)
10a. Photo comparison
Credit: Marek Szczepanek
10b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
10c. Indication
Rarity: Common Presence: Can be observed year round.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl
Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl
11: Black-crowned night heron (Kwak, Nycticorax nycticorax)
11a. Photo comparison
Credit: Mehmet Karatay
11b. Current distribution
Seasonal occurrence http://www.xeno-canto.org
Resident Breeding Non-breeding Passage Uncertain
11c. Indication
Rarity: Rare Presence: Very scarce migratory bird, irregularly breeding. Mainly observed during summer.
Source: http://www.waarneming.nl
Source: http://www.vogelbescherming.nl