Part I: The Impact of French Huguenot Artisans on English Cosmopolitanism During the Reign of William and Mary (1688-1702)
Case Study: English Baroque Designer, Daniel Marot (1661-1752)
Abstract
Three material objects designed in the style of French Huguenot and Dutch immigrant Daniel Marot, a state bed, a Delft pottery garden pot, and a set of six walnut dining chairs, are examined as examples of material objects used by William III, Stadtholder and Prince of Orange in the Dutch Republic of the Netherlands, and Mary II, daughter of the king of England and wife of William, to influence nobles and subjects toward their legitimacy as new rulers of England despite William’s Dutch heritage. This study emphasizes the importance of the role of material objects and how these objects were employed by William and Mary to successfully represent their reign using personal symbolism through objects. As England moved into a new Protestant reign, a parallel shift occurred in the design style of furniture, decorative arts, and architecture. Out went the medieval style of the Jacobean and Carolean era, with its use of oak, dark and heavyset in appearance, to a new lighter, more airy design of Dutch/Flemish influence that included a curved aesthetic, highly decorative forms, crafted primarily in walnut, and with a focus on comfort instead of rigidity. The influence of Daniel Marot, the Architect and Master of Works, facilitated this transition in furniture style in England during the reign of William and Mary. This study provides a deeper understanding of how material objects were used by those in power to influence society in England during the late-seventeenth and early-eighteenth centuries.
Introduction
In the years 2007-2008, during the Great Recession in America, a parallel recession occurred in the antiques and decorative arts market. Although the broader economy seemed to bounce back fairly soon, the decline in the antique market was slower to recover. As the economy fell, there was a move by the rising generation toward more economical purchases. As young families grappled with stretched incomes, a trend of painting traditional, dark-wood furniture purchased from flea markets and estate sales came into fashion. This economical, casual, and lighter tone of furniture was a sharp contrast to the previous generation that held a profound affinity for dark, formal furniture.
Style transitions often occur as a reaction to the shortcomings, mistakes, and hardships of the previous generation. This has occurred throughout the history of furniture, and it is a useful exercise to examine the social and cultural changes that cause drastic change and transitions in style.
One profound example of a transition in furnishings occurred in the seventeenth century. This essay will discuss the cultural event sparked by the accession to the throne by William III and Mary II (1688-1702) of England. Using the interior designer and architect, Daniel Marot, as a case study, this essay will highlight three objects he designed for the joint monarchy to show the transition to the English baroque style. William and Mary used symbolism through the style of objects and furnishings as branding (and even propaganda) to persuade their subjects of their capability as monarchs.
The Life of Daniel Marot in France
Daniel Marot was born in Paris, France, in 1661. This was a time of severe religious struggle between the Catholic Church and Protestant Church in Europe that had lasted for many years. In France, the Edict of Nantes had just been revoked (1685), meaning Protestantism was now unlawful. As a result, French Protestants were severely persecuted and many fled to neighboring countries. These Protestant Frenchmen and women were known as “French Huguenots.” Many were skilled craftsmen and were welcomed by neighboring Protestant countries. Such is the case with Daniel Marot. A Protestant French Huguenot, Daniel, as well as many other French Huguenot families, emigrated to Holland after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Daniel’s father, Jean Marot (1619-1679), had been an established engraver, architect, and craftsman of significance in France. Jean’s published works Petit Marot and Grand Marot are considered some of the most useful sources of historical French architecture, exhibiting designs during the reign of Louis XIV (1638-1715.) Daniel learned his skill and craftsmanship in engraving and design from his father.1 Daniel’s paternal grandfather, Girard Marot, was a cabinetmaker, originally from the Netherlands, but later settled in France. Daniel’s maternal grandfather, Adriaan Garbrand, was a successful cabinetmaker in France known for his work in ebony. Daniel’s maternal uncle, celebrated cabinetmaker to King Louis XIV, Pierre Gole, was also originally from the Netherlands. Daniel’s father and Pierre Gole were married to sisters, Charlotte Garbrand to Jean Marot and Anne Garbrand to Pierre Gole. Pierre arrived in Paris around 1643, married Anne, and later took over his father-in-law’s cabinet shop in Paris. This family connection might explain why Daniel fled to Holland after the Edict of Nantes; his family heritage and some living relatives were connected to the Netherlands. Daniel later married his uncle Pierre Gole’s niece, Catharina Marie Gole, the daughter of Pierre’s brother Adrian.
During his years in France, Daniel worked with his father. He was also a student under the famed French designer and engraver, Jean Le Pautre (c. 1618-1682.) He later worked for the well-known cabinet and case clock maker, André Charles Boulle (1642-1732.) Boulle, a respected and successful craftsman, is responsible for what’s known today in the decorative arts world as “Boulle work,” elaborate inlay using mediums such as metal, including precious metals; horn; ivory; rare wood; or shell. Daniel Marot designed bracket clocks for Boulle. Echoes of Marot’s bracket clock designs can be seen in the later designs of the famous eighteenth-century cabinetmaker Thomas Chippendale (1718-1779.) Marot also worked independently making engravings of designs created by other designers, including those to the king of France, Louis XIV. Born into a successful craftsman family and working under a successful French cabinetmaker to King Louis XIV, Daniel Marot had already made a name for himself before he fled France for Holland.
William and Mary’s Glorious Revolution: Coming to Power in England
To understand how William and Mary used material objects to influence their reign, it is first important to discuss how they came to power during this transitional period. Before becoming king of England, William was the stadtholder and Prince of Orange in the Dutch Republic of the Netherlands. His father was William II, also Prince of Orange, and his mother, also named Mary, was the daughter of the English king, King Charles I. Charles I had offended the Protestant establishment in England by marrying Henrietta Maria, a Catholic French princess. He responded to his adversaries by eventually dissolving Parliament, causing a civil war in England. In 1649, he was ousted and beheaded. The succeeding king, Charles II, was both William and Mary’s uncle.
Mary’s father, James II, was the brother of the English king, Charles II. With Charles II lacking legitimate children, Mary’s father would later become king of England, making Mary second in line to the English throne. Mary married her Protestant first cousin, William of Orange, in 1677. At the wishes of her uncle and king, Charles II, Mary and her sister Anne (later Queen Anne of England) were raised Protestant, even though their father, James II, was Roman Catholic. Charles II, who reigned from 1660-1685, died of internal bleeding, making Mary’s father, James II the new king. Many in England feared England would become a Catholic nation again and were unsettled by this new monarch. James II reigned from 1685 to 1688, when in 1688, William and Mary took over rule in England, making James II the last Catholic monarch in England.
Why did the English people allow the Dutch Prince of Orange to overthrow his English father-in-law without much resistance? The ousting of James II, known as the Glorious Revolution, involved methodical propaganda tools used by those resistant to King James II in England and by William and Mary which had an “enduring impact and lasting success...even before [William] left Dutch shores.”2 However, the simplest explanation might be that the English people accepted William and Mary as their joint monarch because there was “a general reluctance to return to the bad old days of public disorder and civil unrest. Regime change was preferable to another civil war.”3
William and Mary were pretty successful at using propaganda tools as preparations were being made for their invasion of England. Although they had wide-range support, the successful use of a manifesto by William and the help of those sympathetic to their cause certainly made their path forward much easier. This secret manifesto in pamphlet form was created with the help of the English aristocracy sympathetic to William’s cause and Dutch advisors closest to William. The contents were concealed with enormous care until immediately before the invasion.4 There was great anticipation as the pamphlet, titled Declaration, spread through England: “The pamphlet’s coordinated propaganda and the build-up of expectation before it was finally released, ensured that the Declaration had a major impact, not only in England and the United Provinces, but throughout Europe.”5 William III successfully invaded England in 1688 in what is sometimes called the “Bloodless Revolution,” as there was no bloodshed. King James II fled to France and died in exile in 1701. This isn’t the only time William and Mary used propaganda to successfully influence power to their side. They frequently used material objects to influence and propagate power during their rule, not only at home but also across Continental Europe.
Daniel Marot, Architect and Master of Works
Marot’s life after fleeing to Holland from France around 1685 due to religious persecution seemed to blossom from the start. Although Marot had already made a name for himself in France, he had familial ties to Holland in the craftsman industry, initiating his recognition among the elite of Dutch society. Although his father had died by this point, Marot had other family members that fled France for Holland. There are records that indicate his uncle, Pierre Gole (c. 1620-1584) had membership in the Council of the Dutch Church in Paris. This would have been a threat to the family under the Edict of Nantes. Daniel Marot and the Gole family “kept their Protestant faith” and emigrated to the Netherlands.6 The family members of Marot that fled Paris included the two sons of his famous cabinetmaker uncle Pierre Gole, Jacob and Cornelius Gole, as well as the brother of his Uncle Pierre, Adrian Gole, who was the father of Marot’s future wife, Catharina Maria Gole. Marot married Catharina in 1694.
To understand the talent and craftsmanship associated with the family, it is important to note the trades and workmanship of his cousins, Cornelius and Jacob Gole. Jacob Gole, was an engraver, publisher, and playing card maker.7 Cornelius Gole was a cabinetmaker and designer with skill equal to his father, Pierre. Cornelius crafted several pieces of furniture for Louis XIV,8 while later after his emigration, he provided pieces for Whitehall and Kensington commissioned by Queen Mary of England.9
Marot’s work after he left France for Holland progressed quickly. His “earliest known published work...was a commemorative engraving of the ball given to celebrate the birthday of William of Orange in December 1686” before William became king of England.10 Marot had already made his way into the future king and queen’s favor by his reputation in France; therefore, he was hired at once by the stadtholder, Prince William of Orange, and his wife, Mary to “design and install new decorations” for the palace at Het Loo in the Netherlands” before their reign in England.11 He was given the title “chief architect.” When Prince William of Orange and Mary became William III and Mary II of England, Marot almost immediately began designing the architecture, interiors, and gardens at Hampton Court Palace. He was given the title “Architect and Master of Works” by the king. He also designed many decorative objects commissioned by the Court and worked with skilled craftsmen to bring his designs to fruition. His prolific work in designing furnishings for William and Mary resulted in a large portfolio that he later published. This comprehensive portfolio that included his designs and engravings while working for William and Mary is in large part the reason he represents the beginning of the English Baroque period.