Collecting the Painted Netherlands: The Art Collection of Ernest of Austria in Brussels

The (art) collection of Archduke Ernest of Austria (1553-1595) is widely unknown when it comes to early-modern Habsburg collections. Ernest, younger brother of Emperor Rudolf II (b. 1552) and educated at the Madrid court, was appointed Governor-General of the Netherlands by King Philip II of Spain, his uncle, in summer 1593. Ernest relocated his court from Vienna to Brussels in early 1594 and was welcomed there with lavish festivities: the traditional Blijde Inkomst, Joyous Entry, of the new sovereign. Unfortunately, the archduke died in February 1595 after residing in Brussels for a mere thirteen months. This investigation aims to shed new light on the archduke and his short-lived collecting ambitions in the Low Countries, taking into account that he had the mercantile and artistic metropolis Antwerp in his immediate reach. I argue, that his collecting ambitions can be traced back to one specific occasion: Ernest’s Joyous Entry into Antwerp in June 1594. There the archduke received a series of six paintings of Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1525/30-1569) known as The Months (painted in 1565), hanging today in separate locations in Vienna, New York and Prague. These works of art triggered Ernest’s collecting ambitions and prompted him to focus mainly on works of art and artefacts manufactured at or traded within the Netherlands during the last eight months of his lifetime. Additionally, it will be shown that the archduke was inspired by the paintings’ motifs and therefore concentrated on acquiring works of art depicting nature and landscape scenes from the 1560s and 1590s. On the basis of the archduke’s recently published account book (Kassabuch) and of the partially published inventory of his belongings, it becomes clear that Ernest of Austria must be seen in line with the better-known Habsburg collectors and that his specific collection of “the painted Netherlands” can be linked directly to his self-fashioning as a rightful sovereign of the Low Countries.

In vivo nuclear translocation of mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors in rat kidney: differential effect of corticosteroids along the distal tubule

Aldosterone and corticosterone bind to mineralocorticoid (MR) and glucocorticoid receptors (GR), which, upon ligand binding, are thought to translocate to the cell nucleus to act as transcription factors. Mineralocorticoid selectivity is achieved by the 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 (11β-HSD2) that inactivates 11β-hydroxy glucocorticoids. High expression levels of 11β-HSD2 characterize the aldosterone-sensitive distal nephron (ASDN), which comprises the segment-specific cells of late distal convoluted tubule (DCT2), connecting tubule (CNT), and collecting duct (CD). We used MR- and GR-specific antibodies to study localization and regulation of MR and GR in kidneys of rats with altered plasma aldosterone and corticosterone levels. In control rats, MR and GR were found in cell nuclei of thick ascending limb (TAL), DCT, CNT, CD cells, and intercalated cells (IC). GR was also abundant in cell nuclei and the subapical compartment of proximal tubule (PT) cells. Dietary NaCl loading, which lowers plasma aldosterone, caused a selective removal of GR from cell nuclei of 11β-HSD2-positive ASDN. The nuclear localization of MR was unaffected. Adrenalectomy (ADX) resulted in removal of MR and GR from the cell nuclei of all epithelial cells. Aldosterone replacement rapidly relocated the receptors in the cell nuclei. In ASDN cells, low-dose corticosterone replacement caused nuclear localization of MR, but not of GR. The GR was redistributed to the nucleus only in PT, TAL, early DCT, and IC that express no or very little 11β-HSD2. In ASDN cells, nuclear GR localization was only achieved when corticosterone was replaced at high doses. Thus ligand-induced nuclear translocation of MR and GR are part of MR and GR regulation in the kidney and show remarkable segment- and cell type-specific characteristics. Differential regulation of MR and GR may alter the level of heterodimerization of the receptors and hence may contribute to the complexity of corticosteroid effects on ASDN function.

ENaC activity in collecting ducts modulates NCC in cirrhotic mice.

Cirrhosis is a frequent and severe disease, complicated by renal sodium retention leading to ascites and oedema. A better understanding of the complex mechanisms responsible for renal sodium handling could improve clinical management of sodium retention. Our aim was to determine the importance of the amiloride-sensitive epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) in collecting ducts in compensate and decompensate cirrhosis. Bile duct ligation was performed in control mice (CTL) and collecting duct-specific αENaC knockout (KO) mice, and ascites development, aldosterone plasma concentration, urinary sodium/potassium ratio and sodium transporter expression were compared. Disruption of ENaC in collecting ducts (CDs) did not alter ascites development, urinary sodium/potassium ratio, plasma aldosterone concentrations or Na,K-ATPase abundance in CCDs. Total αENaC abundance in whole kidney increased in cirrhotic mice of both genotypes and cleaved forms of α and γ ENaC increased only in ascitic mice of both genotypes. The sodium chloride cotransporter (NCC) abundance was lower in non-ascitic KO, compared to non-ascitic CTL, and increased when ascites appeared. In ascitic mice, the lack of αENaC in CDs induced an upregulation of total ENaC and NCC and correlated with the cleavage of ENaC subunits. This revealed compensatory mechanisms which could also take place when treating the patients with diuretics. These compensatory mechanisms should be considered for future development of therapeutic strategies.

A Forgotten Original or an Original Copy? On MS. Douce 387 in the Bodleian Library: Collecting Early Modern Festival Books

Focusing on one manuscript, today in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, this chapter deals with the question how early modern objects became collectable items. The manuscript is categorized as MS. Douce 387 and its name indicates that it came from the collection of Francis Douce (1757–1834), who was keeper of manuscripts in the British Museum from 1799 until 1811. MS. Douce 387 is described in the catalogue of the Douce’ian collection as the “presentation copy with coloured designs by Marten de Vos and others” of the 1595 printed festival book Descriptio publicae gratulationis … in adventu … Ernesti archiducis Austriae. This festival book, printed in Antwerp’s Plantin-Moretus press, was commissioned by the magistrate of the city of Antwerp to commemorate the Joyous Entry of Archduke Ernest of Austria from June 1594; that an “archducal copy” bound in red velvet was commissioned as well and was owned by the Archduke is know as well. However, first research showed that Oxford copy cannot be this “archducal copy” or Marten de Vos’s artist’s copy even though it is the only know version with a handwritten text and hand-drawn illustrations. It rather should be examined as something totally different altogether. The main question remains why someone then commissioned a hand made version of this festival book, something unknown for other books of this genre? Why would someone between 1600 and 1800 sit down and copy texts and prints from a collectable book? Why was there such an on-going interest in early modern festival books? Could this manuscript be the only later made copy of the “archducal volume” or is it rather a forgery made for the European collectors’ market?