In this painting of Prince Frederick Henry of Orange (son of William the Silent) he is posing in a fine suit of cuirassier armor and holding what looks like a plain wooden stick in his hand. In this painting, as well, he is shown on horseback leading a regiment of cuirassiers and holding the same stick in his hand, this time extending it out to the side, as if pointing to something.
What is this stick? It doesn’t appear to be a weapon of any kind, and it is obviously too short to be a cane or some other type of walking stick. What, then, is this? Is it some kind of telescope? Is it an item of some ceremonial significance?
It’s called a wand of office, baton of office or rod of office. It signifies the holder holds influence in some specific job such as chancellor. Exactly what position it signifies for Freddy is something you could probably find out if you knew what office she held when the paintings were done.
Do a Google image search for those terms and portrait and you’ll find lots of other examples.
At the time both paintings were produced, Frederik Hendrik was stadtholder of several of the Dutch provinces and captain-general of the Dutch army.
But I wouldn’t assume that his baton is the actual insignia of either position. At this date such batons tended to be used more as a generic symbol of military command.
To comment, it was very common for a military leader to carry a batan. Witness Napolean’s famous line that “Every private went to war with a field marshall’s baton in his pack.”
And British field marshals still do. (The Duke of Kent, on the left, is holding one in this picture.) But the point I was trying to make is that they were often used in the seventeenth century, especially in paintings, simply to indicate that someone was a Very Important Military Person. The idea that only certain types of senior officers got one wasn’t codified until later.
There are countless other examples as well. It had by then become a standard prop in military portraits throughout Europe.
But the point historians usually make about the Olivares portrait is that the count-duke’s claims to be a military commander were tenuous at best and so this is more an example of a civilian using what had become the commonplace imagery of military glory in order to pretend to be a distinguished soldier.
For a second I thought you were making a joke and implying that every private did, indeed, carry a baton in his pack. (Although there are stories of drummers heavy drum batons and those eagles with spearheads being used in combat.)
I said “you cannot be serious” and I was right. On the other hand if you had said it was a kaleidoscope it would have made sense to take you resiously.
(You’ve just taught me how to spell that btw, thanks.)
.jpg){kind=link}
