Leiden University Scholarly Publications

In 1553, Sigismund II Augustus of Poland unveiled a set of twenty tapestries depicting the stories of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, and Moses. The "Genesis" tapestries, designed by Michiel Coxcie, are a monumental achievement in Flemish tapestry, but have been largely neglected in anglophone scholarship. Equally, they are an untapped source for studying the religious politics of its patron. This thesis explores the question: what can the "Genesis" tapestries reveal about the relationship between religion and power in Sigismund Augustus’s kingship? 

Using an interdisciplinary historical/art historical methodology, this thesis considers both the vision of the patron and the audience’s reception (based on an eyewitness account). It analyses the significance of the medium and the biblical genre, the political context of the commission, and its materiality, style, narratives, and iconography. 

This thesis finds that "Genesis" is a projection of magnificence,...

In 1553, Sigismund II Augustus of Poland unveiled a set of twenty tapestries depicting the stories of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, and Moses. The "Genesis" tapestries, designed by Michiel Coxcie, are a monumental achievement in Flemish tapestry, but have been largely neglected in anglophone scholarship. Equally, they are an untapped source for studying the religious politics of its patron. This thesis explores the question: what can the "Genesis" tapestries reveal about the relationship between religion and power in Sigismund Augustus’s kingship? 

Using an interdisciplinary historical/art historical methodology, this thesis considers both the vision of the patron and the audience’s reception (based on an eyewitness account). It analyses the significance of the medium and the biblical genre, the political context of the commission, and its materiality, style, narratives, and iconography. 

This thesis finds that "Genesis" is a projection of magnificence, but also of a model for Christian kingship in turbulent times. This study demonstrates the importance of revisiting “the politics of tapestry,” albeit with an increased focus on reception. It also shows the need for more visual/material studies within Polish Reformation history, and calls for a reconsideration of Sigismund Augustus’s crucial place within Polish religious history.