Iconology of the Wayfarer Triptych

It is a pedlar who, likely enough, had killed the cat and stolen the skin, for I am sorry to say that he was a thief, and is painted at a moment of crime. What is he doing with two hats? The one in his hand has just been stolen from the hatless and otherwise occupied individual in the background. It is, indeed, a fisherman’s hat and has his float and cast pinned on to it. The very long fishing-rod leans up against the Swan Inn in the background. The thief is hurrying away unobserved, for the barmaid is being kissed by a soldier and the old woman in the kitchen is probably poor-sighted. An owl and a dog alone take notice of the crime. Inexplicable by me is the curious fact that Bosch has given to his thief the most refined face he ever painted… A thief-pedlar, however, might have been something less of an aristocrat. (pp. 341-342)

One of the most outstanding pieces made for the church during Bosch’s lifetime was the baptismal font produced in 1492 by Aert van Tricht of Maastricht (active 1492-1510), a true masterpiece still to be seen in the church [van Tricht, ca. 1492]. Although there is no record of Bosch having provided designs for the font, the supporting figures of the lame and the blind [van Tricht, Lower part detail of baptismal Font at Church of Saint John, ca. 1492] are reminiscent of those in The Pedlar at Museum Boijmans van Beuningen in Rotterdam… (p.31)

A good example of Bosch’s taking from sculpture is also to be found in the Haywain: one of the misericords in the choir stalls (again late fifteenth-century) of the Grote Kerk in Breda (a town lying some fifty kilometres from ‘s-Hertogenbosch) represents a pedlar [Brabant, ca. 1460] who looks over his shoulder and at the same time tries to keep away an aggressive dog with a stick, bringing to mind the pedlar in the exterior panels of the Haywain Triptych [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515] and in the Rotterdam tondo. (p. 75)

Vagrants are another common subject in his work, as in The Pedlar [Maroto, 2001, 41-46; Vandenbroeck, 2002, 308-340; Vandenbroeck, 2001, 49-64]… At least two phenomena came into play here. First, there was a strong socio-economic polarization, which resulted in large numbers of unemployed, wanderers and poor; secondly, there was the emergence of a middle class ideology characterized by such required norms as diligence, thrift, sobriety, stability, indoor work, domestic life and social ‘conversation’ (or civility). Consequently, the attacks on those who represented the diametric opposite of these values became more vehement: such people had no place in the estates of the realm and were generally portrayed as poor through their own fault, and lecherous, dim, foolish and antisocial. (p. 97)

On the reverse of the lateral panels [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515] Bosch depicted the subject of the Pilgrimage of Life (the Pedlar), which he had painted in semi-grisaille a few years before on the exterior of the now dismembered triptych of the same name. (p. 232)

The grey-haired old man who was originally on the outer (closed) sides of the triptych’s wings is an itinerant trader; judging from the attributes hanging from the wicker basket on his back, his wares included cat-skins and soup ladles. [Bruegel, 1564]. The bodkin and thread pinned to the hat he holds indicates that he was also active as a cobbler, while the holes in his clothing and his mismatched shoes point to a life of misery. It is possible that he has just squandered his money in the dilapidated house behind him. (p. 294)

A pedlar with a soup ladle and skins hanging from his pack can also be seen in the foreground of Pieter Bruegel the Eider’s Christ carrying the Cross in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna [Bruegel, 1564]. (p. 301, note 10)

We will never know if the pedlar has just left the brothel, is merely walking past it, or is thinking about turning around to go back there. The cloth tied around his leg shows that he has been wounded, most likely bitten by a dog – an animal invariably portrayed in both word and image as the enemy of travelling vendors. A good example of this can be seen in the church of Breda, where a misericord carving dating from around 1460-70 shows a dog biting a pedlar in the leg [Brabant, ca. 1460; Koldeweij, vandenbroeck & Vermet, 2001, 78, note 25; Bax, 1953, 200]. (p. 294)

In the same church, a misericord dating from the same time bears a depiction of a pedlar with a hat in one hand whose pose strongly resembles that of Bosch’s pedlar[Bax, 1953, 200]. (p. 301, note 13)

Remarkably, there is also a foot sticking out of the pedlar’s coat on the outer side of the panel, but it does not seem to be a pig’s trotter. (p. 301, note 20)

The figure of the pedlar/vagabond, who appears in both the closed wings of the Hay Wain Triptych in the Prado and in the now octagonal panel in Museum Boijmans van Beuningen, visualizes those allegorical writings in which the whole of human existence is conceived in terms of a pilgrimage. One of the earliest and most influential treatises on the mystical alternatives for actual pilgrimages is the Pèlerinage de la vie humaine by the Cistercian author Guillaume de Deguilleville, which was written in 1330-31 [de Diguleville, ca. 1330-1331]. Several 15th-century versions were published, including a Middle Dutch edition, entitled Boeck van den pelgherym, that appeared in Haarlem in 1486 [Bellaert, 1486]. The book states explicitly that all human beings are pilgrims on their way to the heavenly Jerusalem. Other 15th-century texts emphasize the same point. However, Bosch deliberately avoids presenting his pedlar/vagabond as a stereotypical pilgrim, with all the familiar attributes that might identify him as such. The artist’s ‘pilgrim of life’ is thus able to avoid the negative associations that had become attached in Bosch’s time to itinerant pilgrims, whether or not they were indeed on their way to a particular place of pilgrimage. (pp. 62-63)

In Bosch’s image, the man has packed all his worldly goods into a high wicker basket that he carries on his back, lugging his earthly burden along the path of his life. It has been frequently suggested in the literature that it is a goods basket – a pedlar’s pack- and that the man would therefore have to be a pedlar (as indeed he is called throughout this book). However, we ought to be careful about identifying him too literally; the point is that, like every Christian, he must follow the difficult path of his life, weighed down by the burden of his earthly existence. He lives his life in imitation of Christ, considering Jesus’ example day by day, hour by hour, and bearing his burden. This reading of Bosch’s two, heavily laden vagabonds is reinforced by the title page of an edition of the famous book by Thomas à Kempis, the Dutch edition of his lmitatio Christi, published in Antwerp in 1505 [Kempis, 1505]. The page is decorated with a woodcut showing Christ giving his blessing as Salvator Mundi, which is accompanied by the words ‘No follower of mine shall walk in darkness, says the Lord’ (John 8:12) in both Latin and Middle Dutch. These opening words of the lmitatio Christi epitomize the whole Devotio Moderna movement and are the key to the interpretation of Bosch’s two pedlars. The Christ giving his blessing on the title page looks down at an angle towards the figure of a heavily laden man, who appears in the frame of the woodcut, surrounded by monsters and vines. The resemblance to Bosch’s pedlars is striking, although his basket is filled with the grapes he has picked, the eucharistic symbolism of which is fairly plain. (pp. 63-64)

A panel showing the Flight into Egypt, now in Sternberk, is very interesting in this respect. Attributed to a ‘Brussels Master, circa 1500’ [”Flight into Egypt”, ca. 1500], the Joseph figure shows a remarkable similarity to Hieronymus Bosch’s pedlars, as Paul vandenbroeck already noted in 1981 [Vandenbroeck, 1981]. The Rotterdam Pedlar and, somewhat more freely, the one on the exterior of the Hay Wain in the Prado [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515], belong to a group of rather mannered, laden-down male figures, which appear in manuscripts, prints and paintings from the final quarter of the 15th century, especially in the shape ofJoseph, leading Mary and Jesus to Egypt, but also as pedlars and in the guise of the Prodigal Son. Dürer too included a Joseph looking back in the Flight in his ‘Marienleben’ series, which he created between 1500 and 1505 and which sparked a series of copies and imitations. One of the misericords in the late-Gothic choirstalls of the Grote Kerk in Breda [Brabant, ca. 1460] features a pedlar harassed by a dog similar to the one in Rotterdam. The Breda choirstalls were carved around 1460, immediately after the new vault was installed in the choir. The similarities with Bosch’s pedlar are very striking, suggesting once again that a common source or group of examples was in circulation. (p. 78)

There is only one instance in which Bosch shows an ordinary person ‘walking the straight path’ as the principal theme of a painting. There are two autograph versions of the Pedlar, one on the outside of the Hay Wain Triptych [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515], the other on the Rotterdam panel… The other Pedlar in Rotterdam is similar to the one in the Hay Wain in many respects, although his gaze is sterner and his hair is greying rather than white already. He has just passed a rundown brothel and is about to open a gate that bars his way. A magpie sits on the lowest bar of the gate, which stands next to a tree, with an owl perching on a bare branch. The bird stares at a great titmouse in the branches below. (pp. 183-184)

The Prodigal Son, for example, is now often called The Vagabond [Philip, 1958, pp.1-81]… Brand Philip’s study of The Prodigal Son, already mentioned, attacks the traditional chronology of Bosch’s work. She regards this painting, generally accepted as a late work, as possibly depicting one of the four temperaments, one of four medallions on the exterior of a lost triptych. (p. 99)

Het schilderij van Bosch wordt geacht het oogenblik voor te stellen, waarop de zondaar, tot inkeer gekomen, het huis, dat het tooneel zijner zonde geweest is, verlaat. Met zijn mand op den rug uitgedoscht als marskramer [Holbein, ca. 1523 – 1525; van Leyden, ca. 1520-1530], draagt hij allerlei kenteekenen, die aan zijn verblijf in het huis der vreugden herinneren. (p. 78)

Een kattevel zal wel meer door rondzwervende marskramers meegevoerd zijn, die, als het zoo voorkwam, van kattenmeppen een bijverdienste maakten; maar ook herinnert het aan het leven, waarin de zondaar verkeerd heeft: een oude katsjager is een aanbidder van het schoone geslacht in ongunstigen zin [Harrebomée, 1870, 238]; dat past voortreffelijk bij dezen man. (p. 78)

De hoed, dien de man in de hand houdt, lijkt tamelijk overbodig, nu hij zich het hoofd met een lap gedekt heeft. Er bestaat een reeds in de eerste helft der zeventiende eeuw geboekstaafd spreekwoord; een nieuwe hoed verdienen, in de beteekenis van: geld verdienen door iemand aan een vrouw te helpen [Harrebomée, 1912, col. 785]. Wil de schilder te kennen geven, dat de zondaar zoo diep gezonken is, dat hij koppelaarsdiensten bewezen heeft? Wellicht heeft het hoofddeksel meer te maken met de beteekenis van verliefdheid, die in de zestiende eeuw aan de muts werd gehecht. In een referein van Jan van Doesborch komt de uitdrukking „metter mutsen doorreden” voor [Kruyskamp, 1940, 31, no. 11], die door den uitgever een wel wat gewaagde beeldspraak wordt gevonden [Kruyskamp, 1940, 10]. Op het schilderij is echter de hoed of muts doorstoken met een schoenmakerspriem, waar de pikdraad nog aanzit. Dergelijke zonderlinge versiersels yan hoofddeksels, als pijlen en messen, komen bij Bosch meer voor [Glück, 1933, 12]. De priem hier zal wel een symbolische beteekenis hebben: ik vermoed, dat wij een zeer platte phallische woordspeling erin moeten zien, in verband met de obscene beteekenis, die het werkwoord: pinnen, dat in eigenlijken zin een schoenmakersbewerking aanduidt, kan hebben [1]. (pp. 79-80)

Wie eenigszins thuis is in onze middeleeuwsche literatuur, wordt bij het zien van het hondje, dat den man aanblaft, en van den stok, waarmede deze zich in het secure neemt, herinnerd aan de regels, waarin Willem van Hildegaersberch het vagebondenleven schildert [Bisschop & Verwijs, 1870, 172] (pp. 82-83)

Hannema claimed that it was a self-portrait. Baldass and Sudeck suggested instead the moralising theme of the wanderer (an old pedlar), similar to that on the outside of the wings of The Triptych of the Hay Wain [Baldass, 1926; Baldass, 1943; Baldass, 1959; Sudeck, 1931; Bosch, ca. 1512-1515]; Pigler held the figure to represent one of ‘Saturn’s children’ and called attention to a Florentine engraving of 1460 representing a wanderer, a pig and a scaffold [Pigler, 1950, 132; Baldini, ca. 1464]; his suggestion was taken up and elaborated by L. BrandPhilip as part of her conjectured series on the four planets, elements and temperaments [Philip, 1958]; this was denied by Bax and by Tolnay [Bax, 1962; de Tolnay, 1965]. (p. 112)

Mrs Brand-Philip …interprets the peddler (as she considers his profession to be) as the type of the Melancholic humour (thin, pale, poor, cheerless) [Philip, 1958] (p. 112)

…the peddler, like the charlatans. is a dishonest person: the scene of his business is the seedy house in the background [Philip, 1958]. (p. 112)

Bosch’s best known pilgrim figures are the so-called ‘Prodigal Son’ at Rotterdam (Plate 58), and the wayfarer on the external panels of the Haywain triptych [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515, “The Haywain Triptych”]. These two suffering and isolated men, who wander unhappily through scenes of violence, corruption and lust, are aware that they are not, or should not be of this world. And yet, at the same time, they are troubled in their attempts to resist its pull. In both paintings, the wayfarers are depicted as peddlers. This could be Bosch’s way of emphasising their lack of a permanent home in the world. They are strangers in Satan’s realm, even though they are also attracted by it (p. 163).

The peddler at Rotterdam is walking away from an inn, but he looks backwards over his shoulder at the same time as he moves forwards (p. 163)

The fact that Bosch chose not to depict the traveller as a pilgrim does not mean he is not one, but it does make the figure less clear-cut. It is understandable, therefore, that this wayfarer has also been variously described in the art-historical literature as the ‘Prodigal Son’, the ‘Pedlar’ and ‘Everyman’. The theme of the repentant sinner and that of the Prodigal Son do not rule one another out, though – one is the extension of the other. The detail with the pigs at a trough in front of the inn towards which the wayfarer looks back is so striking that it is hard to believe a viewer in Bosch’s time could have seen it without immediately thinking of the familiar parable [de Bruyn, 2001, 165–97; English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Luke, 15:11-32]. The fact that the man has a pack on his back argues against his identification as the Prodigal Son, but it does not make him a pedlar either, which is why the more neutral term ‘wayfarer’ has been used here [Schreiber, 1926, 32-33, no. 820-825]. (p. 320)

Even the critics who agreed with Glück needed supplementary theories in addition to the “Prodigal Son theory” in order to explain these features [Glück, 1904; Glück, 1933; Puyvelde, 1956, 103f.; de Tolnay, 1937, 46f.].There are, moreover, many scholars who doubted the correctness of Glück’s interpretation on the whole and tried to disprove it [Conway, 1921, 341f.; Winkler, 1924, 165; Baldass, 1926, 117; Baldass, 1938, 69; Baldass, 1943, 18, 232; Sudeck, 1931, 17f.; Vermeylen, 1939, 48f.; van den Bossche, 1944, 46; Meijer, 1946, 2f.; De Boschère, 1947, 20; Bax, 1949, 222f.; Pigler, 1950, 132f.; Seligmann, 1953, 97f.]. Yet the new interpretations offered have remained somewhat general and vague. The painting has never been linked to any other traditional theme as well- known and well-defined as the story of the parable. It is therefore by no means surprising that the name The Prodigal Son has clung to Bosch’s representation, though it is sometimes also called The Peddler. (p. 3)

The awl and the tarred thread which are pinned held by the peddler are symbols of his original profession and him as a cobbler, a craft thought to be connected. [Pigler, 1950, 132]. In the popular astrological treatises cobbling or shoemaking the professions belonging to this planet, and a cobbler is also the section of Saturn in the Salone di Padua [Pigler, 1950, 132; Hauber, 1916, 53, 80; Strauss, 1926, 21; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 58, pl. XX: fig. 35]. (p. 6)

It seems that there are only two alternatives for the interpretation of such can either be the planet god Saturn in person or the personification of the Four Humors, the Melancholic… The transformation of a pagan a part in astrology into a profane figure of every-day life may very well be a personal reinterpretation by Bosch in accordance with tendency [Gutekunst, 1899; “Saturn and his children, from Passauer Calendar”, 1445; Panofsky & Saxl, 1933, 228f.]… The other explanation that represents the type of the Melancholic is in much closer accord existing tradition, and this is the explanation which leads us to the interpretation of all the other elements in the painting… The close connection of the Melancholic with Saturn is well known [Philip, 1958, 10:note 24; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 3f., 4, 4:note 2, 15f., 20f., 23, 69, 69:note 2; Beets, 1954, 275; Dürer, 1514; Vostre, 1502]. In spite of being depicted in quite a different way in the Shepherd’s Calendar and in other popular representations of the Four Humors in the fifteenth century, where the Melancholic usually appears as a rich elderly man with a walking stick or a purse, there is evidence that he could just as well be represented as another and, as it were, “opposite” Saturnian type, as a poor wretched creature [Heitz, 1906; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 5-15; Panofsky, 1939, 78; Die vier Temperamente, ca. 1481; Der Melancholiker, 15th century]. (pp. 9-10)

Characteristically enough, Beets, without even suspecting that the subject-matter of Bosch’s Peddler may have something to do with the Melancholic Humor, compares the painting to Dürer’s Melencolia* I [Beets, 1954, 275; Dürer, 1514]. (p. 10:note 24)

A woodcut by Hans Leonhard Schäuffelein showing the Melancholies depicts them as crippled beggars [Scháufelein, ca. 1525]… To replace the figure of the rich elderly man traditional in representations of the Melancholic Humor by a “child” of Saturn may have been a familiar method in Bosch’s time. This woodcut gives evidence not only that the Melancholic Humour could be represented by miserable creatures but also that these creatures could be “children” of the planet Saturn as represented in the Planetenkinderbilder. The beggars as well as the peddler appear as “children” of Saturn in the Italian print. To replace the figure of the rich elderly man traditional in representations of the Melancholic Humor by a “child” of Saturn may have been a familiar method in Bosch’s time. (pp. 10-11)

…one possible reason for Bosch’s portraying the Melancholic not as a beggar but as a peddler. There is a close relation between the business of peddling and the earth. The feet of a vagabond or peddler constantly tread the soil ; the Dutch word landloper (land-louper, vagabond) which has often been used as a name for the Rotterdam painting implies the idea of his connection with the earth or the land. The earth is the domain of Saturn, the old deity of the fields, and “Earth” is the one of the Four Elements traditionally linked with “Melancholy” in works of art and literature in which the Four Humors are related with their corresponding elements [Philip, 1958, 11:note 27; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 4, 7, 23f. 24:note 1; Roscher, 1878, III, col. 2518f.; Frey, 1957, I, col. 1256-1261; Schönsperger, 1922, fol. G 5 r; Mâle, 1908, 318; Hauber, 1916, 231]. Bosch’s figure of the peddler seems to imply not only melancholia but its traditional companion-idea of terra as well. (p. 11)

Bosch’s figure of the peddler seems to imply not only melancholia but its traditional companion-idea of terra as well. This assumption seems to be confirmed by the character of the animal symbol which appears on the right of the painting. The cow or ox behind the grated gate is a large figure in a comparatively empty area and as such is much more prominent than any of the small elements on the more crowded left side. It seems to be a symbol which carries considerable weight in the context of the painting, and this animal symbol may express the double idea of the representation in the same way as figure next to it. (pp. 11-12)

Bosch’s original of the Conjurer seems to have represented a “child” of Luna as a symbol for phlegma and aqua in the same way as the Peddler represents a “child” of Saturn as a symbol of melancholia and terra [Bosch, ca. 1475; Philip, 1958, 17:note 37, 34:note 64; Boll & Bezold, 1931, 50, 124; Gundel, 1922, 133f.; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 4, 78f., note 3; Hauber, 1916, 62f.] (pp. 33-34)

There is even a figure represented groups in the foreground of the Hay-Wain which reminds in the Rotterdam painting. The traveling musician in forward movement, counteracted by his looking back, is to the traveling trader of the painting in the the Boymans Museum [Philip, 1958, 69:note 144; Bosch, ca. 1512-1515]. (p. 54)

The peddler is obviously coming from this tavern; his looking back to it makes this point perfectly clear. The inn, however, is has brought financial ruin upon him, as has been assumed who took the figure for the Prodigal Son. Quite to the peddler the tavern is a place of business and provides him with a living. The connection between the inn and the peddler is a Vagrant vendors found their best clientele and made their places like this. The peddler was a standard figure in taverns traders are frequently represented in such surroundings century compositions [Philip, 1958, 68:note 141; van Hemessen, 1536; Ganz, 1924, 146; Enklaar, 1937, 94]. The peddler painted by Bosch has undoubtedly sold wares in the inn. We know from representations of the time that mirrors formed important part of the goods which peddlers carried in their back-baskets [Philip, 1958, 68:note 142; Bruegel, 1562; van Bastelaer, 1908, 148; Hollstein, 1949, 284]. We may, therefore, not go too wrong in assuming that the girl at the window has been purchased from the Peddler. (pp. 67-68)

We know from representations of the time that mirrors formed important part of the goods which peddlers carried in their back-baskets [Philip, 1958, 68:note 142; Bruegel, 1562; van Bastelaer, 1908, 148; Hollstein, 1949, 284]. (p. 68)

The peddler is obviously coming from this tavern; his looking back to it makes this point perfectly clear. The inn, however, is has brought financial ruin upon him, as has been assumed who took the figure for the Prodigal Son. Quite to the peddler the tavern is a place of business and provides him with a living. The connection between the inn and the peddler is a Vagrant vendors found their best clientele and made their places like this. The peddler was a standard figure in taverns traders are frequently represented in such surroundings century compositions [Philip, 1958, 68:note 141; van Hemessen, 1536; Ganz, 1924, 146; Enklaar, 1937, 94]. The peddler painted by Bosch has undoubtedly sold wares in the inn. We know from representations of the time that mirrors formed important part of the goods which peddlers carried in their back-baskets [Philip, 1958, 68:note 142; Bruegel, 1562; van Bastelaer, 1908, 148; Hollstein, 1949, 284]. We may, therefore, not go too wrong in assuming that the girl at the window has been purchased from the Peddler. (pp. 67-68)

A sin characteristic of the peddler’s profession seems to be indicated by the second figure representation at the tavern, the amorous couple. The connection of this representation to the main figure of the painting has given rise to various speculations [Pigler, 1950, 135; Philip, 1958, 68:note 143]. I think, that this connection, too, is a professional one, and that the peddler was the one who brought the two people together. That would mean, that the side-line of the peddler is procuring [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515; Philip, 1958, 54: note 115-116] (pp. 68-69)

Procuring probably was the most lucrative part of the peddler’s activities. Bosch apparently meant to reveal this point above all. The procuring in his Peddler corresponds to the stealing of the purse in his Conjurer [Bosch, ca. 1475]…Bosch also had shown that not the official professional work of a dubious character but his concealed sideline is the real money-making proposition of his trade. (p. 69)

The third figure representation at the inn is a man relieving himself. This figure is not represented inside the building as are the others, but appears outside. It seems to be similar to them also in its meaning and it, too, may refer to what the peddler has done in the activity of his does not seem to be a professional one in the the word but rather a typical vice which is characteristic connected with the profession of a peddler. A figure relieving himself frequently occurs in art in drinking [Philip, 1958, 19:note 39-40, 70:note 147; Lafond, 1914, 86-87; Hollstein, 1949, VI, 22; du Hameel, ca. 1478-1506; Donatello, ca. 1457-1464; Titian, 1518; Michelangelo, 1533]. Surely the peddler had had his share of drinks Many of his attributes point to this, and even the wound the result of a fall during drunkenness. That the peddler also been assumed by Bax [Philip, 1958, 70:note 148; Bax, 1949, 224f.; Hauber, 1916, 75; Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 27]. It is again in this characterization ard that the figure corresponds to the conjurer [Bosch, ca. 1475], for distinctly characterized as a glutton [Philip, 1958, 34:note 66]. (pp. 69-70)

Despite his drinking in the tavern, the peddler cannot be regarded as the “victim” of this evil house, where his drinks were probably even free of charge. All writers who had taken this figure for the Prodigal Son, assumed that the peddler was the victim of the evil. But the peddler is by no means and in no respect the victim of the evil tavern. Quite to the contrary, according to the practices in low-class brothels in the middle ages, the girls were held like slaves by keeping them in debt and vagrant traders working in collusion with the inn-keepers were part of a scheme for the exploitation of the of the prostitutes [Philip, 1958, 70:note 150; Avé-Lallemant, 1858, 334f.; Bloch, 1912, 724f., 767, 769]. To the middle ages it was not so much the prostitutes themselves but the people taking advantage of prostitution who were utterly detested [Philip, 1958, 71:note 151; Bloch, 1912, 632f., 645, 818f.; Rabutaux, 1881, 22f.; Sanger, 1897, 97f.]. A figure like the peddling drunkard who probably cheated and over- charged the girls in their purchases and whose side-line it was to procure customers for them, was an odious person to the public of the time. (pp. 70-71)

Bosch’s painting of the Peddler is a representation of the Melancholic which is firmly based on the traditional negative concept of this humor in the middle ages [Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 21f., 27]… Bosch’s lonely Melancholic shown in his life-journey leading to disgraceful death, is the personification of the Saturnian vices of lethargy and misanthropy. To the middle ages these were the two deadly sins of acedia and invidia, concepts which were not only closely connected with the idea of melancholia but partly even identical with it [Panofsky, Giehlow & Saxl, 1923, 30f.; Bloomfield, 1952, 428, note 30; Philip, 1953, 289, note 95; Philip, 1958, 51:note 115, 75:note 163]. (p. 75)

Das Rotterdamer Bild stellt einen durch Kiepe und Wanderstab gekennzeichneten Hausierer dar. Er ist nicht so sehr der “verlorene Sohn” der Bibel als vielmehr der neue Typus eines “Weltkindes”, das vor allem auf Gewinn aus ist. Er wendet seinen Blick zurück, so als könne er mit der Vergangenheit nicht ganz brechen und der Zukunft noch nicht ins Auge schauen. Verläßt er diesen verrufenen Ort durch das Gatter, und eröffnet sich ihm jenseits eine neue Welt? (p. 182)

Können Hausierer überhaupt den Sündenpfad verlassen? In den Augen von Hieronymus Bosch sind weder der Stand des Armen noch der Beruf des Händlers eine Voraussetzung für eine positive “peregrinatio”. Ein Hausierer kann eigentlich nur ein Negativ-Held, ein Schandmal, sein. Ein Läuterungsweg wird im Rotterdamer Bild nur angedeutet, fort von der sündigen Taverne, hin zur “grünen Aue” [English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Psalm, 23]. Auf die Verallgemeinerung als Lebensweg weist auch die Rundform hin. Es ist die Welt und gleichzeitig ein Spiegel, in dem sich jedermann erkennen kann. (p. 182)

He has been called, among other things, the Prodigal Son [Glück, 190, 177ff.; de Tolnay, 1966, 369], the Wayfarer [Baldass, 1943, 232], a fool [Combe, 1946, 78], a peddler [Seligmann, 1953, 104; Renger, 1969, 66-67; Tuttle, 1981, 88:note 6; Mollat, 1966, 17; de Tolnay, 1966, 179], Saturn [Pigler, 1950, 132-136], a personification of melancholy [Philip, 1958, 115-132], a man endangered by the sin of sloth [Zupnick, 1981, 1-81], a drunkard [Bax 1949, 222-230; Bax, 1962, 1-14], and Everyman, the Christian pilgrim [Gibson, 1973, 101-106]. (p. 88)

Renger believes that the figure in the Rotterdam tondo is an impoverished peddler and swindler [Renger, 1969, 66-67]. This interpretation of the Rotterdam figure agrees on some points with that offered in the second part of this paper. Seligman and Renger call the backpack a peddler’s basket, but although peddlers did use such baskets they were not carried only by peddlers [Seligmann, 1953, 104; Renger, 1969, 66-67]. Anyone traveling by foot who had to carry something would be likely to have some sort of a pack on his back, especially if he was a vagrant poor man who had to keep his few belongings with him. Michel Mollat describes the typical medieval poor man as a vagrant who carries a pack on his back and a walking stick in his hand [Mollat, 1966, 17]. A basket similar to those in the Haywain and the Rotterdam tondo is used by a demon for carrying damned souls in the center panel of Bosch’s Last Judgment triptych [Bosch, ca. 1504-1508; de Tolnay, 1966, 179] (p. 88:note 6)

That pack certainly explains why Bosch’s figure is an itinerant, wandering the countryside. Because of his specific occupation, the Rotterdam vagrant cannot be fully allegorized as a true everyman, Augustine’s man-the-pilgrim moving through this world, as some scholars have argued [Chew, 1962; Tuve, 1966, 145-218]. Of course this allegory underlies the Puritan John Bunyan’s famous Pilgrim’s Progress [Bunyan, 1678], a consideration of the World, the Flesh, and the Devil. But peddlers in the sixteenth century were frequently associated with tavern life, that is, with gambling, drinking, and deceit. Such a figure actually appears with his pack behind the name figure in the Prodigal Son by Jan van Hemessen [van Hemessen, 1536]; he holds dice, and his clothing contrasts with the extravagant fasluons of the Prodigal Son himself (the denouement of the parable with both the swine and the return to the father appears in miniature in the background) [Renger, 1970, 27]. (p. 254)

That pack certainly explains why Bosch’s figure is an itinerant, wandering the countryside. Because of his specific occupation, the Rotterdam vagrant cannot be fully allegorized as a true everyman, Augustine’s man-the-pilgrim moving through this world, as some scholars have argued [Chew, 1962; Tuve, 1966, 145-218]. Of course this allegory underlies the Puritan John Bunyan’s famous Pilgrim’s Progress [Bunyan, 1678], a consideration of the World, the Flesh, and the Devil. But peddlers in the sixteenth century were frequently associated with tavern life, that is, with gambling, drinking, and deceit. Such a figure actually appears with his pack behind the name figure in the Prodigal Son by Jan van Hemessen [van Hemessen, 1536]; he holds dice, and his clothing contrasts with the extravagant fasluons of the Prodigal Son himself (the denouement of the parable with both the swine and the return to the father appears in miniature in the background) [Renger, 1970, 27]. (p. 254)

Another index of the contemporary associations of peddlers’ trinkets with their foolish materialism is provided by Pieter Bruegel’s print, engraved by Pieter van der Heyden and published in Antwerp by Hieronymus Cock, A Peddler Robbed by’ Monkeys [van der Heyden, 1562 (Marskramer door apen beroofd)], which shows a sleeping peddler whose trivial goods are appealing only to those simple animals [Orenstein, 2001, 219, no. 95; Silver, 1996, 136-138; Wierix, ca. 1568]… de Bruyn has sought and found various popular literary representations of the peddler as a positive figure, sometimes in the role of “warner” or truth-te!ler (waarschuwer) in serious urban rhetoricians’ plays, often moral allegories, by such important authors as Cornelis Everaert of Bruges [de Bruyn, 2001 (Hieronymous Bosch’s So-Called Prodigal Son Tondo), 134-136; de Bruyn, 2001, 199-255; Vandenbroeck, 2002, 144; Hummelen, 1958, 148-151]. (pp. 254-256)

De Bruyn associates the animal with the well-known, still-extant phrase “hellhound” and he further surmises that the bandage on the peddler’s leg is the sign of an earlier bite, a wound redolent of sin [de Bruyn, 2001 (Hieronymous Bosch’s So-Called Prodigal Son Tondo), 137-139]. (p. 256)

…the peddler is more careful, looking out for his canine nemesis and using a stick to ward it off, just as he takes a wide path around the temptations of the tavern behind him [de Bruyn, 2001 (Hieronymous Bosch’s So-Called Prodigal Son Tondo), 137-139]. (p. 256)

…de Bruyn considers that the heavy pack on his back contains not just the stuff of the peddler’s trade but rather his burden of sins another common metaphor, then and now [Zupnick, 1968, 121-122, no. 25]. The presence on his pack of a prominent large spoon (or ladle) of self-indulgence as well as a cat skin ensures that this peddler is neither without desires nor an innocent [Silver, 2006, 410-411:note 30; Bax, 1979, 216-217; Renger, 1970, 129-142; Bruegel, 1568 (Les Mendiants ou Les Culs-de-jatte); Tóth-Ubbens, 1987, 73-76]. (p. 256-257)

The presence on his pack of a prominent large spoon (or ladle) of self-indulgence as well as a cat skin ensures that this peddler is neither without desires nor an innocent [Silver, 2006, 410-411:note 30; Bax, 1979, 216-217; Zupnick, 1968, 115-132; Renger, 1970, 129-142; Bruegel, 1568 (Les Mendiants ou Les Culs-de-jatte); Tóth-Ubbens, 1987, 73-76]. (p. 256-257)

The presence on his pack of a prominent large spoon (or ladle) of self-indulgence as well as a cat skin ensures that this peddler is neither without desires nor an innocent [Silver, 2006, 410-411:note 30; Bax, 1979, 216-217; Zupnick, 1968, 115-132; Renger, 1970, 129-142; Bruegel, 1568 (Les Mendiants ou Les Culs-de-jatte); Tóth-Ubbens, 1987, 73-76]. For example, a cat stealing a squab from a plate appears prominently within the painting of a brothel by Jan van Hemessen [van Hemessen, 1543], in which another older traveler, still wearing his hat, is being accosted, despite his feeble resistance, by a group of young harlots as well as an old bawd; meanwhile a dog crouches beneath the table. The cat, then, should be construed as an image of these loose women, and wearing a cat skin could show (like the bandage on his leg) that the peddler has a past in the taverns as a “skirt chaser” or “cat hunter” (katsjager). Hemessen’s image… offers the equivalent of an interior view of the tavern-brothel of Bosch’s background, complete with drink and women plus tavern cats and dogs.(p. 256-257)

…wearing a cat skin could show (like the bandage on his leg) that the peddler has a past in the taverns as a “skirt chaser” or “cat hunter” (katsjager). (p. 257)

Bosch’s Peddler shows a repentant sinner, who carries the scars of his former transgressions (bandage, cat skin) and still looks vulnerable to temptation, but who also seems to be attempting to rake a new path in his life. To the extent that Christian doctrine teaches that all humans are sinners, he could be understood as an allegory for Everyman on his pilgrimage of life. Yet his specifics of lower-class identity and poverty, of express sinfulness in a shabby tavern-brothel, can hardly be taken to be the measure of the middle-class (still less the elite) viewing audience for Bosch’s works. We also need to remember that this image of the Peddler formed the exterior of those two other Bosch wings, the Washington Usurer and the Paris-New Haven scenes of luxuria [Bosch, ca. 1475-1500; Bosch, ca. 1495–1500; Bosch, ca. 1485-1490]. In this context, the Rotterdam Peddler can be understood as a lesser version of those same activities – financial gain and pleasure-seeking-and a call (like the image of the angel in the Washington panel) toward reform… Virtually the same character of a thin, wandering old man in shabby clothes also appears on the exterior of one of Bosch’s most significant morality triptychs, the Haywain triptych [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515]… (pp. 259-260)