Servet met de verovering van Neuhäusel, Gran, Buda en Pest door Leopold I, keizer van Duitsland after 1686

Curator: Well, look at this—an after 1686 linen napkin currently held at the Rijksmuseum. It’s titled "Servet met de verovering van Neuhäusel, Gran, Buda en Pest door Leopold I, keizer van Duitsland." What are your first thoughts on it? Editor: Intricate, definitely. Ethereal, even. The pale relief on the white textile makes the depiction feel ghostlike, as if we are recalling faded memories. A material culture echoing the past. Curator: It is incredible how the weave can depict such detail, isn’t it? These types of napkins were often created to commemorate historical events or to celebrate rulers, right? This one’s obviously connected to Leopold I and those victories. The weave memorializing power… feels like it’s designed for future generations, which we now embody, holding it in posterity. Editor: Exactly. And what does it mean to literally "consume" victory? This isn’t just decorative—it’s performative. Dining, feasting, the body itself becomes a site where imperial narratives are digested, literally and figuratively. It invites us to contemplate the relationship between power, ritual, and the everyday. How can such commonplace objects, embedded in ordinary, if often very exclusive, rituals perpetuate ideology so quietly? Curator: Right, and on another level—this also exists because of incredibly meticulous craftswork that might remain unnamed. As if the work has no author because we do not remember or inscribe them. This brings a dimension of care and attention to the scene of warfare and conquest. There’s something really haunting about knowing how many hours it probably took to weave that. All that skill poured into glorifying conquest. Editor: Yes! Labor is absolutely part of this equation. Whose hands spun this tale of conquest? Were they celebratory or burdened? The cloth holds that unspoken tension. The victory becomes not a cause for joy, but a process dependent on bodies and labor to even emerge materially into being. The design then has to contend with a different type of violence enacted. A violence over the weavers. Curator: That’s really potent. In that case, seeing this as a physical object, what stories this piece could weave! I see your points regarding those critical perspectives, that you weave together, through social and historical understandings that can disrupt any kind of glorious retelling this textile would have in mind! Editor: Absolutely, thank you for such thoughtful musings! Now, I wonder what we'll unravel next?