Vernietiging van de Engelse vloot bij Chatham, ter ere van Michiel Adriaansz. de Ruyter 1667

Curator: Let’s consider this medal from 1667 commemorating the destruction of the English fleet at Chatham, honoring Michiel Adriaansz de Ruyter. Editor: My first impression is pure admiration for the craftsman. Look at the detail! It makes you wonder about the hands that shaped it, the tools that gave form to metal... I almost feel like I can hold history in my hands. Curator: Exactly. We’re seeing material and production merging with social narrative here. The piece acts as an object of memorial, it's almost propaganda. It served as a statement of power for the Dutch Republic, celebrating a very strategic military victory. Editor: You can feel that Dutch confidence, can’t you? Imagine sporting this medallion back in the day! Although it's an engraving, there's something intrinsically robust about the Baroque style—a tangible statement. Curator: Indeed, and that’s tied to the raw material as well. The choice of metal, its inherent value, wasn't arbitrary. It underscored the gravity of the event and, more importantly, cemented the legend of de Ruyter for consumption by future generations. Editor: Yes, material choices do speak loudly, don't they? But I can also imagine the silent labor of the engraver to capture de Ruyter’s portrait, an ordinary person working with passion, giving shape to fleeting events. To make sure he did it right. It also begs the question - why did the artist choose to immortalize that historical moment into a medal instead of a monumental sculpture? Curator: Perhaps due to how widespread medal production would make the message go? Regardless of the reasoning, looking at the metal, the engravings... it really gives us a lot to think about in terms of art. Editor: Yes! And the tactile nature—that medal being physically passed down through generations is beautiful. This makes art, and really, it brings so many fascinating dimensions.