What do you think?
Rate this book
Pieter Bruegel the Elder: Fall of the Rebel Angels
Pieter Bruegel the Elder: Fall of the Rebel Angels is the first comprehensive book on one of the most cherished masterpieces in the collection of the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. Bruegel's dizzingly complex -Fall of the Rebel Angels- (1562) is presented in this lavishly illustrated volume in microscopic detail, and placed in its wider context in the texts, which argue that, with this painting, Bruegel turned a traditional devotional theme into an innovative commentary on his own time. Many of the angels in Bruegel's scene are hybrids of natural and artificial forms, just as the curiosity cabinets of the time would juxtapose -naturalia- and -artificialia- for the connoisseur, connecting the painting to early modern European cultures of knowledge and collecting.
- GenresArtArt HistoryHistory
208 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2014
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 8, 2021
Pieter Bruegel the Elder's works cry out for a detailed manner of looking and puzzling. And that is exactly what Meganck did with her book on Bruegel's Fall of the Rebel Angels. She dissects each individual element and places it in a cultural and historical context Of Antwerp and Brussels at the eve of Revolt and Iconoclasm. It is a good combination of an introductory reading to the period and artist, without reducing its scientific and scholarly scope.
January 15, 2018
Consciousness is only important to those who don't have it. I take the sphere descending in the blue sky as the moon in every child's dream of wholeness unremembered, descending into their life in just the colors Bruegel seeks, a lunar white with tones of gold, the perfect light of love and a blue sky impossible to see with such a moon perhaps, since it is day and the moon enlarged so impossibly to indicate its nearing, as though some revelation is at hand. and one is. The painting is about who owns heaven and earth and the heaven descending in the sphere in the sky indicates the lovely nature of heaven and the angels defending it, whilom they and the rebels have consumed all talk.
We have to appreciate the lunar calendar and its nature, the importance of new moon and full, the effect upon the tides of the sea and obviously upon the course of humanity, so you would think that blood moons were worth attending to. The lunar calendar seems secondary among a people of the sun, the solar calendar, a people consumed with pagan, meaning Babylonian, Greek, Roman designations of the heavens, who name Sunday after the sun, what they consider the god of the heavens, dear Plotinus we love you, but, but the sun is not the Father or the Son and He who made creation. So Falls judgment upon the days of the week named for these gods and upon the months of the year named for these gods and even upon the way we figure time according to these gods, whose false apparitions permeate all of literature of Greece and Rome which became our legacy in England and America. We're only talking about ourselves here in the Antwerp and Brussels transport where Bruegel was made. Evening and morning make the day, not morning and evening, which matters since the day begins at dusk and dawn is mid day. Saying it that way shows how far the fall. And what are the agents of it? Whatever they were they became three footed beasts and creeping things made over into chimeras, so that is view of the reality that the Angels overthrow and judge, chimeric reality, a hybrid endlessly devolving.
I know more of the Dutch revolt than before. Consider it a bonus, but still I have not seen the seven headed dragon. It smacks of the author trying too hard or the reader not enough. There are small details throughout that distract. Calling Fall of the Rebel Angels an apocryphal story troubles me as much as calling Archangel Michael Saint Michael, for he is distinctly not a saint, even if Johnny Kleck http://insightstatutes.blogspot.com/2... thinks him his brother. This misnomer was applied to him. Michael is always called Michael, familiarly so to speak, but is not one of the angels that the apostle says we are to judge. The story is scriptural, considering Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 and many significant references sprinkled in the Psalms, not to speak of the New Testament. Meganck says the fallen angels were popular in illuminated book manuscripts. Her mastery of such things must be greater than her understanding of the Hebrew traditions. I object to her sneaking around implying and insinuating before turning these slights of hand into facts, which they are not. This habit of ill composition happens over and over. So she says "Fall is Bruegels' first depiction of a story, albeit an apocryphal one, from the Old Testament" (58). It's like she overheard gossip and dresses it up in jargon, as when Antwerp is called a transit zone for the occult because John Dee, the English court astrologer was there for the publication of his Monad, but he was not the court astrologer then, not at all. Dress up makes something out of nothing, speculating. She says both Dee and Bruegel knew Ortelius and might have met in 1562, irrelevant to the painting which would have been planned long before that, hence, that "Bruegel shared Dee's fascination with the idea of a forgotten Ur-language for magic and alchemy, angels and devils - all of which he translated into vivid images" (58) is Nonsense. Makes me think of Madonna's hermetic red thread or blondes researching alchemy in The Folger.
The same comprehension extends to references to the seven deadly sins, which were universal in all Britain and Europe. She calls it "sinful animal symbolism" (63), just as she turns depiction of an armadillo in Fall into "depiction of rare and exotic animals" (72) although the showing of the extensive bestiary and borrowings from new world exploration, and the notion that the whole piece suggests a collection of Breugel's would be patron, justify the price of the book. "Most of the animals Bruegel cites in the Fall, as befits the theme of mutating angels, are hybrids, combinations of different species as well as composites of art and nature" (72). Locusts, dragonflies, swallowtail butterflies, blowfish, flying fish, sloth, goats, spoonbill, lizard, suggestions of elephant, ape, marmosets, all confected with musical instruments, hurdy-gurdy, trumpet, and household items, sundial, weapons, armor, all portray "the Ur-battle between good and evil, an armed encounter that took place before the creation of mankind' (96). Another layer of headdress feathers, Ottoman helmets and sword, knights. The Frans Floris altarpiece she proves a precursor for Bruegel, where "evil falls right on to the viewer, as it were: we do not see through the eyes of God, but find ourselves in the midst of a battle between angels and devils, animals and things" (48).
I differ with her about the "half-disc of light of the Empyrean realm, the divine world that shines on the sublunary world from above. Underneath it concentric disks of blue are rendered, the color of the air, which gradually transition into brown tones...lower down we see the yellow-gold of the hellfire" (104). Doesn't sublunary give it away that this is the moon? To me it is entirely a lunar luminescence, as above. What intrigues is the statement about "preparatory studies left behind in the studio" (107) which in other cases were maybe copied by Bruegel's sons, which suggests the time and infinite pains that must have been taken to execute the painting, which you can view online in great detail, as good as it gets.
The essence of the painting is evoked "in the Christian worldview, the mingling of species was believed to go against the will of God and was therefore seen as a mark of evil" (109). This is set against woodcuts of the seven headed Hydra, but the little word Christian denotes a worry implicit in the critic that these marks of evil might be arbitrarily so. For the record, Maimonides http://insightstatutes.blogspot.com/2... and a thousand Jews and Muslims, with Buddhists share the belief. I'll add some footnotes. Meganck is so at pains to justify the natural with the imaginary as if she worked at the ASU Biodesign Institute. The rhetoric below surface blurs the line between the two, justified by, "the early modern obsession with monsters was therefore also intimately connected with the political and religious troubles" (111). Hirsutes and dwarfs, spectres and burlesques crossed the boundaries of existing classes" (112) which she calls their notion of contemporary comedy, not the horror coming down her street to carry off the Dutch. These themes of course are the reason why this painting is of such total relevance to ourselves.http://encouragementsforsuch.blogspot.... So the concealment of the seven headed beast in the painting is more apt.
This is just out a few months and a good chance to penetrate the painting by Bruegel, but be of comfort if you have not, it was painted in 1562 but only properly attributed to him in 1898. Withal I will tell my impression of both book and painting, then properly give whatever reservations there are about conflating the Rebels with the Dutch revolt.
We have to appreciate the lunar calendar and its nature, the importance of new moon and full, the effect upon the tides of the sea and obviously upon the course of humanity, so you would think that blood moons were worth attending to. The lunar calendar seems secondary among a people of the sun, the solar calendar, a people consumed with pagan, meaning Babylonian, Greek, Roman designations of the heavens, who name Sunday after the sun, what they consider the god of the heavens, dear Plotinus we love you, but, but the sun is not the Father or the Son and He who made creation. So Falls judgment upon the days of the week named for these gods and upon the months of the year named for these gods and even upon the way we figure time according to these gods, whose false apparitions permeate all of literature of Greece and Rome which became our legacy in England and America. We're only talking about ourselves here in the Antwerp and Brussels transport where Bruegel was made. Evening and morning make the day, not morning and evening, which matters since the day begins at dusk and dawn is mid day. Saying it that way shows how far the fall. And what are the agents of it? Whatever they were they became three footed beasts and creeping things made over into chimeras, so that is view of the reality that the Angels overthrow and judge, chimeric reality, a hybrid endlessly devolving.
I know more of the Dutch revolt than before. Consider it a bonus, but still I have not seen the seven headed dragon. It smacks of the author trying too hard or the reader not enough. There are small details throughout that distract. Calling Fall of the Rebel Angels an apocryphal story troubles me as much as calling Archangel Michael Saint Michael, for he is distinctly not a saint, even if Johnny Kleck http://insightstatutes.blogspot.com/2... thinks him his brother. This misnomer was applied to him. Michael is always called Michael, familiarly so to speak, but is not one of the angels that the apostle says we are to judge. The story is scriptural, considering Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 and many significant references sprinkled in the Psalms, not to speak of the New Testament. Meganck says the fallen angels were popular in illuminated book manuscripts. Her mastery of such things must be greater than her understanding of the Hebrew traditions. I object to her sneaking around implying and insinuating before turning these slights of hand into facts, which they are not. This habit of ill composition happens over and over. So she says "Fall is Bruegels' first depiction of a story, albeit an apocryphal one, from the Old Testament" (58). It's like she overheard gossip and dresses it up in jargon, as when Antwerp is called a transit zone for the occult because John Dee, the English court astrologer was there for the publication of his Monad, but he was not the court astrologer then, not at all. Dress up makes something out of nothing, speculating. She says both Dee and Bruegel knew Ortelius and might have met in 1562, irrelevant to the painting which would have been planned long before that, hence, that "Bruegel shared Dee's fascination with the idea of a forgotten Ur-language for magic and alchemy, angels and devils - all of which he translated into vivid images" (58) is Nonsense. Makes me think of Madonna's hermetic red thread or blondes researching alchemy in The Folger.
The same comprehension extends to references to the seven deadly sins, which were universal in all Britain and Europe. She calls it "sinful animal symbolism" (63), just as she turns depiction of an armadillo in Fall into "depiction of rare and exotic animals" (72) although the showing of the extensive bestiary and borrowings from new world exploration, and the notion that the whole piece suggests a collection of Breugel's would be patron, justify the price of the book. "Most of the animals Bruegel cites in the Fall, as befits the theme of mutating angels, are hybrids, combinations of different species as well as composites of art and nature" (72). Locusts, dragonflies, swallowtail butterflies, blowfish, flying fish, sloth, goats, spoonbill, lizard, suggestions of elephant, ape, marmosets, all confected with musical instruments, hurdy-gurdy, trumpet, and household items, sundial, weapons, armor, all portray "the Ur-battle between good and evil, an armed encounter that took place before the creation of mankind' (96). Another layer of headdress feathers, Ottoman helmets and sword, knights. The Frans Floris altarpiece she proves a precursor for Bruegel, where "evil falls right on to the viewer, as it were: we do not see through the eyes of God, but find ourselves in the midst of a battle between angels and devils, animals and things" (48).
I differ with her about the "half-disc of light of the Empyrean realm, the divine world that shines on the sublunary world from above. Underneath it concentric disks of blue are rendered, the color of the air, which gradually transition into brown tones...lower down we see the yellow-gold of the hellfire" (104). Doesn't sublunary give it away that this is the moon? To me it is entirely a lunar luminescence, as above. What intrigues is the statement about "preparatory studies left behind in the studio" (107) which in other cases were maybe copied by Bruegel's sons, which suggests the time and infinite pains that must have been taken to execute the painting, which you can view online in great detail, as good as it gets.
The essence of the painting is evoked "in the Christian worldview, the mingling of species was believed to go against the will of God and was therefore seen as a mark of evil" (109). This is set against woodcuts of the seven headed Hydra, but the little word Christian denotes a worry implicit in the critic that these marks of evil might be arbitrarily so. For the record, Maimonides http://insightstatutes.blogspot.com/2... and a thousand Jews and Muslims, with Buddhists share the belief. I'll add some footnotes. Meganck is so at pains to justify the natural with the imaginary as if she worked at the ASU Biodesign Institute. The rhetoric below surface blurs the line between the two, justified by, "the early modern obsession with monsters was therefore also intimately connected with the political and religious troubles" (111). Hirsutes and dwarfs, spectres and burlesques crossed the boundaries of existing classes" (112) which she calls their notion of contemporary comedy, not the horror coming down her street to carry off the Dutch. These themes of course are the reason why this painting is of such total relevance to ourselves.http://encouragementsforsuch.blogspot.... So the concealment of the seven headed beast in the painting is more apt.
This is just out a few months and a good chance to penetrate the painting by Bruegel, but be of comfort if you have not, it was painted in 1562 but only properly attributed to him in 1898. Withal I will tell my impression of both book and painting, then properly give whatever reservations there are about conflating the Rebels with the Dutch revolt.
August 29, 2025
When I saw this piece in the Royal Museum I immediately wanted to learn more about it. This ended up being the perfect book as it not only explains every detail within the piece, but it also provides excellent commentary as to the political and cultural climate that inspired Bruegel to craft the characters in the manner he did. Bruegel's fallen angels are not simply spliced together out of random elements, but are carefully constructed to reflect contemporary attitudes of the New World and the elites' desire to showcase their knowledge of the natural and artificial world.
As an added bonus, the front and back pages include a nice roadmap that number each detail of the piece, making it easy to follow the author's commentary on every section. Meganck includes a variety of interesting images to develop her thesis, and her writing is readable and straightforward.
As an added bonus, the front and back pages include a nice roadmap that number each detail of the piece, making it easy to follow the author's commentary on every section. Meganck includes a variety of interesting images to develop her thesis, and her writing is readable and straightforward.
March 5, 2023
Mooie illustraties en zooms van details. Het formaat (A5) vind ik wel te klein voor zo'n grote schilderijen.
De auteur is duidelijk een expert, maar heeft de uitleg nogal traditioneel aangepakt (nummers, noten, verwijzingen in lange teksten per hoofdstuk). Dit maakt het boek minder toegankelijk om door te bladeren en onderwerpen te cherry picken. Dit kan hedendaagser.
Verder ook herhaling en prenten die meerdere keren terug komen.
De auteur is duidelijk een expert, maar heeft de uitleg nogal traditioneel aangepakt (nummers, noten, verwijzingen in lange teksten per hoofdstuk). Dit maakt het boek minder toegankelijk om door te bladeren en onderwerpen te cherry picken. Dit kan hedendaagser.
Verder ook herhaling en prenten die meerdere keren terug komen.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews