RKD STUDIES

162. Zes wandtapijten uit een reeks met de Geschiedenis van Dido en Aeneas

... nden zich al vanaf 1677 in het stadhuis van Nijmegen. Ze werden toen, same...

... r bleven deze twee bijzondere reeksen wandtapijten na afloop van de vredesbesprekingen in het stadhuis van Nijmegen. De reeks met de Geschiedenis van Dido en Aeneas (cat. 162-a-f) zou tot 1939 de wanden blijven sieren van de westelijke Gedeputeerdenkamer, die in latere tijden werd gebruikt als Raadzaal en vervolgens als de Trouwzaal van het stadhuis, maar in 1944 door brand werd verwoest. Na de restauratie in de periode 1953-1963 kregen deze wandtapijten uiteindelijk in 1982 een plaats in de Burgerzaal in het nieuwe secretariegebouw van het stadhuis, waar ze fraai tot hun recht komen. Sinds 2010 hangt de reeks daarnaast steeds voor een periode van vijf jaar in de Vrede van Nijmegenzaal van Museum Het Valkhof, in een roulatiesysteem met de reeks met Metamorfosen naar Ovidius (cat. 163-a-g).2...

... staan van gemerkte wandtapijten met dezelfde voorstellingen is echter bekend dat de beide reeksen zijn vervaardigd op de...

... behoren tot de voltallige reeks ook nog voorstellingen met Dido's banket en met de Dood van Dido. Gezien het feit dat de ruimte waarin de Nijmeegse Aeneasreeks vanaf 1677 tot 1939 steeds heeft gehangen niet groot genoeg was voor acht wandtapijten is het niet aannemelijk dat er in Nijmegen oorspronkelijk meer dan zes wandtapijten uit deze reeks aanwezig zijn geweest.3 Het was zelfs zo passen en meten om de tapijten over de beschikbare wandruimte te verdelen, dat het wandtapijt met het Afscheid v...

... ende noch daer by op het uyterste syn devoir gedaen'.5 Uit deze opmerkingen van Michiel Wauters kan allereerst worden opgemaakt dat Romanelli deze reeks in opdracht van Wauters heeft ontworpen ('Sr. Romanelli Saliger heeft mij daer inne gedient') en, ten tweede, dat hij naast de ontwerpen zelf ook de kartons vervaardigde ('is van Sig.r Gio Fran.co Romanelli geschildert ende geteeckent')....

... is van Dido en Aeneas voor Wauters maakte. De eerste documenten waarin deze wandtapijten worden vermeld dateren pas uit 1673,...

... riche in het Palais du Louvre.11 Een figuurgroep in de schildering met de Sabijnse maagdenroof is zelfs bijna letterlijk gelijk aan Dido die met Aeneas vlucht voor het onweer op cat. 162-d.12 Opvallend is dat de wandtapijten alweer minder verwantschap hebben met de plafondschilderingen die Romanelli iets later, in 1656-1658, ook in het appartement d'été van Anne d'Autriche in het Palais du Louvre schilderde.13 Daarom lijkt het zeer aannemelijk dat de ontwerpen voor de Aeneasreeks in dezelfde tijd als het Grand Cabinet, rond het jaar 1655, werden gemaakt....

... de wandtapijten van de Geschiedenis van Dido en Aeneas, verspreid ...

... ich bij het overlijden van Michiel Wauters in 1679 bij de handelaar Antonio Verpennen te Rome in consignatie bevond.19 De scheepjes in de cartouche in de bovenboord zijn hoogstwaarschijnlijk een verwijzing naar de reis van Aeneas. Het lijkt daarom aannemelijk dat deze boorden bij deze reeks werden ontworpen. Ook het vuur op het altaar, symbool voor de offers die de verliefde Dido aan de goden bracht teneinde Aeneas in Carthago t...

... digd of geleverd, dateren uit de periode 1671-1679, zoals ook de uitvoering van het stadhuis van Nijmegen, die in 1677 werd aangekocht. De reden hiervoor is niet duidelijk. Mogelijk had Wauters, voor wie volgens zijn eigen getuigenis, zoals boven reeds werd vermeld, Romanelli de ontwerpen en kartons had getekend en geschilderd, door een tot op heden onbekende oorzaak deze niet eerder tot zijn beschikking gekregen.21...

... zich in de Zweedse koninklijke collectie te Stockholm drie Aeneastapijten die zijn voorzien van de wapens van koningin Hedwig Eleonora en de weverssignatuur M.WAVTERS. Deze zijn daar in elk geval aanwezig sinds 1674 en behoren tot een oorspronkelijk uit acht wandtapijten bestaande reeks in het slot Drottningholm.26 Ook het koninklijk paleis van Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh en de Accademia di Brera in Milaan bezitten elk een reeks van drie wandtapijten met de Geschiedenis van Dido en Aeneas.27 Enige reeksen bestaande uit twee wandtapijten en verschillende afzonderlijke exemplaren bevinden zich, naast in enkele internationale musea, veelal in particuliere collecties en in de kunsthandel.28...

... is van Dido en Aeneas, cat. 162-a-f, werd tussen 1953 en 1960 gerestaureerd bij de Stichting Werkplaats tot herstel...

... esco Romanelli gevolgd, zoals in de afbeelding van Juno: 'als een echte jageres had zij zich met een lichte boog getooid, de wind bespeelt haar losse lokken, haar plooiend kleed is opgeknoopt en laat de knieën bloot'.31Voor het ontwerp van dit wandtapijt zal Romanelli zich hebben laten inspireren door een schilderij met een vergelijkbare compositie door Pietro da Cortona uit omstreeks 163532, waarvan hij eerder al een vrij getrouwe kopie schilderde.33Het karton voor deze voorstelling is niet overgeleverd. Uit de vergelijking met andere overgeleverde exemplaren met Aeneas ontmoet zijn moeder Venus blijkt dat cat. 162-a een smalle weergave is van de oorspronkelijke voorstelling, waarbij de figuur van Achates links is weggevallen.34Conditie:Restauratie bij de Stichting Werkplaats tot herstel van Antieke Textiel te Haarlem, 1955-1960. Hierbij werden alle delen in zijde vervangen....

... van het vierde wandtapijt, direct na Het offer van Dido aan Juno, dat het zou zijn in de interpretatie met Dido in sprakeloos verliefde toestand.Een voorbereidende tekening van Giovanni Francesco Romanelli die in verband te brengen is met het ontwerp voor dit wandtapijt bevindt zich in het Ashmolean Museum te Oxford.38 Het karton is in het Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena.39 (afb. a)Meerdere figuren op cat. 162-b, zoals Aeneas in vol ornaat, de zittende steenhouwer links vooraan en de man op de achtergrond die de ladder beklimt, lijken hernames te zijn van figuren die Romanelli schilderde op het plafond van het Grand Cabinet in het appartement d'été van Anne d'Autriche in het Palais du Louvre.40Conditie:Restauratie bij de Stichting Werkplaats tot herstel van Antieke Textiel te Haarlem, 1954-1960. Hierbij werden alle delen in zijde vernieuwd....

... t enige wandtapijt in de Nijmeegse reeks dat de signatuur van ontwerper Giovanni Francesco Romanelli linksonder draagt,43 evenals alle andere bekende exemplaren met de voorstelling van Het offer van Dido aan Juno.44Een voorbereidende schets van Romanelli voor de gehele voorstelling van Het offer van Dido aan Juno bevindt zich in het Courtauld Institute of Art (Witt Collection) in Londen.45 Een studie van het hoofd van Dido voor deze voorstelling was in 1983 in de kunsthandel te Rome.46 Het karton is in het Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena.47 (afb. b)Conditie:Restauratie bij de Stichting Werkplaats tot herstel van Antieke Textiel te Haarlem, 1955-1963....

... anelli in het Grand Cabinet de la Reine in het appartement d'été van Anne d'Autriche in het Palais du Louvre uit 1655. De groep van een soldaat die een vrouw vastgrijpt in de schildering met de Sabijnse maagdenroof is bijna letterlijk gelijk aan Dido die met Aeneas vlucht voor het onweer op cat. 162-d.51 De houding van Dido op cat. 162-d is eveneens vergelijkbaar met die van de Sabijnse vrouw geheel links op die schildering en ook de kleding van Aeneas op het wandtapijt lijkt op die van een Romein op de voorgrond van de Sabijnse maagdenroof.Het karton voor Aeneas en Dido vluchten voor het onweer is in het Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena.52 (afb. c)Conditie:Restauratie bij de Stichting Werkplaats tot herstel van Antieke Textiel te Haarlem, 1954-1959....

... neis IV, 265-276, waarin Mercurius, in opdracht van Jupiter, Aeneas herinnert aan zijn belofte om een nieuwe staat in Italië te stichten, en dus niet bij zijn geliefde Dido in Carthago te blijven.Het karton voor deze voorstelling is niet overgeleverd.De zwevende figuur van Mercurius in cat. 162-e lijkt sterk op de Mercurius op een plafondschildering uit 1653 door Giovanni Francesco Romanelli in de Villa Lante te Bagnaia bij Viterbo.54...

... reeks te Nijmegen niet is vertegenwoordigd.Conditie:Restauratie bij de Stich­ting Werkplaats tot herstel van Antieke Textiel te Haarlem, 1954-1959. Oorspronkelijk was deze voorstelling verdeeld over twee smalle wandtapijten, van respectievelijk 117 cm en 120 cm breedte, bestemd voor de muurdammen tussen de vensters. Bij de restauratie zijn deze tot één wandtapijt samengevoegd. De voorstelling werd aangevuld aan de hand van een foto van het exemplaar uit Wenen. Het karton voor deze reconstructie werd geschilderd door C. Vis. De oorspronkelijke, op het smalle formaat ontworpen, boorden aan de boven- en onderzijde zijn vervangen door nieuw geweven boorden naar het voorbeeld van die van de andere vijf wandtapijten.58...

34. Twee wandtapijten uit een reeks met de Geschiedenis van Rinaldo en Armida

... le uitvoeringen bekend zijn: eenentwintig reeksen met veertien verschillende typen boorden.8 Verschillende bekende wandtapijten in deze reeks zijn voorzien van het merk van Raphael de la Planche (P Franse lelie RP), de directeur van de werkplaats van de Faubourg Saint-Germain in Parijs (1633-1661).9 Ook werd de grootste bewaarde reeks, van tien wandtapijten, waaronder drie entre-fenêtres, oorspronkelijk van kardinaal Antonio Barberini (1608-1671) in Rome, nu in het Flint Institute of Arts, Flint (Michigan), door deze werkplaats geweven tussen 1633 en 1637.10 Daarnaast komt ook regelmatig het merk AC voor van Alexander de Comans, de directeur van de werkplaats in het Hôtel des Gobelins aan de Faubourg Saint-Marcel in Parijs (1635-1650)11 en dat van zijn filiaal te Amiens (A Franse lelie). Er zijn geen exemplaren meer bekend die in de Louvre werkplaats in Parijs werden geweven.12De wandtapijten cat. 34-a-b zijn voorzien van brede, rijk gedecoreerde boorden met bloemslingers, cartouches met imitatie stucwerk en putti. Deze werden waarschijnlijk eveneens ontworpen door Simon Vouet, die gewoonlijk het totaalontwerp van de wandtapijten maakte, hoewel ook van zijn medewerker Jean Cotelle (1607-1676) verschillende tekeningen bekend zijn voor de rijke boorden van wandtapijten naar Vouet.13Het type boorden als rond cat. 34-a-b werd ook gebruikt voor rond de wandtapijtreeksen met de Geschiedenis van Odysseus en van de Amours des Dieux, beide eveneens naar ontwerpen van Simon Vouet. Een wandtapijt met Odysseus meert zijn schip aan bij het eiland van de godin Calypso van het chateau van Chambord heeft boorden naar nagenoeg hetzelfde ontwerp als cat. 34-a-b, maar in andere kleurstellingen uitgevoerd en met het merk van Amiens in de stootboord.14 Hetzelfde type boorden als van cat. 34-a-b komt ook voor rond een reeks van zeven wandtapijten met de Amours des Dieux naar Vouet samen met een wandtapijt uit de Geschiedenis van Rinaldo en Armida, ook met dezelfde boorden, van het chateau van Champchevrier (Indre-et-Loire), eveneens met het merk van Amiens.15...

... kend, zo zijn er geen familiewapens ingeweven, maar deze zal zich bevonden hebben in de hofkringen rond de Franse koning Lodewijk XIII, daar dit ook voor andere vergelijkbare reeksen geldt.19 Evenmin zijn er verdere gegevens bekend over de herkomst van cat. 34-a-b en het bijbehorende derde wandtapijt van voor de veiling in 1930 uit de collectie van Ludwig Breitmeyer, een tot Brit genaturaliseerde uit Duitsland afkomstige diamanthandelaar. Hij bezat ook nog een aantal wandtapijten die stamden uit de collectie van Lord Grimthorpe, de vorige bewoner van zijn huis 11 Connaught Place in Londen, zoals blijkt uit de veilingcatalogus uit 1930, maar daar hoorde deze reeks niet bij.20...

... ische slaap gedompelde Rinaldo neer te steken...

... n de Faubourg Saint-Germain, ca. 1633-1637, nu in het Flint Institute of Arts, Flint (Michigan), waar rechts in de lucht op een wolk nog twee figuren zijn afgebeeld, die niet op cat. 34-a voorkomen.24 Dat laatste is ook het geval bij een exemplaar in een reeks van vier van het chateau van Azay-le-Rideau (Touraine), vervaardigd in de Faubourg Saint-Marcel en een exemplaar zonder boorden van een veiling in Parijs in 1926.25 Een entre-fenêtre met deze voorstelling, uitgevoerd door de werkplaats van Raphael de La Planche, met iets andere boorden dan de Barberinireeks, werd in 1900 tentoongesteld in het Grand Palais in Parijs uit het bezit van de tapissier Lemaire. Een exemplaar uit een reeks van vier was in 1900 in de Parijse collectie Sarciron.26...

... xemplaar met de wapens van het echtpaar François Petit de Villeneuve en Marie-Anne Foucault en de merken van Alexander de Comans en RTALVE, in het Cummer Museum of Art, Jacksonville, heeft weer een ander type boorden.33 Een wandtapijt in een reeks van vier van het chateau van Haras du Pin (Orne), uitgevoerd in de Faubourg Saint-Marcel, ca. 1636-1650, bezit weer andere boorden en de wapens van de Staatsraad (Conseiller d'État) Jean II de Choissy (1571-1652).34 Een ander exemplaar uit een reeks van vier was in 1900 in de Parijse collectie Sarciron.35 Een exemplaar zonder boorden is bekend van een New Yorkse veiling in 1945.36 Een wandtapijt met deze voorstelling, maar zonder de wagen van Armida rechts, behoort tot de zogenoemde Barberinireeks, uitgevoerd in de Faubourg Saint-Germain, ca. 1633-1637, nu in het Flint Institute of Arts, Flint (Michigan).37...

A4.2.12 - A4.2.20

... 992 catalogue, the tonality and painterly technique of this picture are reminiscent of works by the Hals workshop from the late 1620s.1 Especially the fla...

... modelling of the face places this painting in the 17th century, and therefore in Hals’s workshop. Unfortunately, this assessment can only be based on an old black-and-white reproduction. The painting has not surfaced since 1937....

... The execution of the collar and hair differs from the technique of Hals and his workshop....

... passage may not be original and could be the result of later reworking.3 Both heads are modelled fairly confidently; the one at the back is based on facial studies in the style of the children’s heads listed above (A4.2.2, A4.2.3, A4.2.4, A.4.2.5). Wallerant Vaillant (1623-1677) reproduced the painting in a reversed mezzotint (C21) [8]....

... Slive assumed a reference to 16th-century models in the otherwise unusual composition in profile.4...

... framed picture appears in the background of a merry company by Dirck Hals (1591-1656), dated 1639.7Hofrichter attributed the present painting to Judith Leyster (1609-1660), which seems quite plausible to me, especially when we assume that a template by a different hand was used for the head.8 However, in the absence of a decisive comparative work from Leyster’s hand, a definitive attribution does not appear possible to me....

... isherboy, c. 1636-1638...

... danger of the carrying straps slipping, as Slive plausibly argues.9 Nevertheless, the manner of execution is harder than that of Hals. Unlike in the two previously listed pictures, the brushwork is angular in character, both in the light streaks and in the dark contours. The anatomically impossible wrists and palms indicate a superficially trained assistant, who was not competent in handling the proportions and foreshortening of the human anatomy....

... isherman playing the violin, c. 1636-1638...

... this specialist, which is supported by the comparison with several other works, especially Two fisherboys (A3.30). Based on his observation of overlapping layers of color, he concludes that the execution of the background was completed before that of the figure.10 It is not possible to identify the tower that is depicted in this painting and in appears in this picture and in Laughing fisherboy with a basket (A4.2.29). It is ‘quite possibly an invention rather than a depiction of a specific site’.11...

... isherman playing the violin...

... isherman playing the violin in Madrid (A4.2.18)....

... isherman playing the violin...

... isherman playing the violin in Madrid (A4.2.18)....

... ishergirl, c. 1636-1638...

... cially the Antwerp boy (A4.2.20), the Dublin boy (A4.2.21), and the girl in Cologne (A4.2.22). It demonstrates a tendency frequently observed in the work of followers, who do not use Hals's expressive brushstrokes in the face, but rather let them run riot on risk-free areas such as that of the blouse. Nevertheless, the sketch-like manner in which the girl's head has been painted, is attractive. In its tonality and angular modelling, it is close to the head of Malle Babbe in New York (A4.2.31). I would therefore also consider Frans Hals the Younger (1618-1669) as a possible author of the present figure. Whether the elder Hals created a preparatory sketch, or initially sketched the composition onto the canvas, will be difficult to determine even with infrared photography, since almost all contours are covered with black or grey paint. In 1937, Van Dantzig made the interesting observation that the figure was painted prior to the background.17 Such a division of labor seems probable in most pictures from this group. As the depictions of fisherchildren in Antwerp, Dublin, and Cincinnati (A4.2.23) suggest, the execution of these compositions commenced with the head and upper body of the figure....

... isherboy in a landscape, c. 1636-1638...

... . The melting transition from impasto to transparent paint, that is apparent in Hals's Schwerin roundels (A1.35, A1.36), as well as in the head of the Young woman selling fruit and vegetables of 1630 (A2.9), is completely absent in the present painting. The dunes in the background are sketched in an evenly opaque, soft style of painting, probably by another hand. It matches with several other backgrounds in fisherchildren paintings.A similar subject – fishermen with a basket full of their catch – has been depicted in the foreground of Beach scene with fishermen, attributed to Jan Miense Molenaer (c. 1610-1668) (B14)....

... isherboy in a landscape, 19th century...

... s it repeats the subject, while fully disregarding the painterly style....

... ombines the figure types from the Antwerp Fisherboy (A4.2.20) and the Schwerin Laughin...

3.3 The personal circumstances of the painter Frans Hals

... lem on 19 March 1591 - the first documentary evidence of the family there. When a member of the Antwerp civic guard, father Franchois Hals was still listed as a Catholic. This may be interpreted in different ways, perhaps it was only a temporary assimilation. In any case, Frans Hals was also baptized a Catholic, for otherwise he would not have needed to convert to the Reformed faith in 1655. The Catholic affiliation of the father and the sons Frans and Joost certainly raises the question whether the reasons for the family leaving Antwerp were religious or economic....

... Frans Hals undertook the valuation of the 29 paintings on the list. A valuation of five paintings is documented on 16 August 1662, done by Hals for the merchant Emanuel Demetrius. Together with De Molijn and Jan van de Velde II (1593-1641), Hals received the most bizarre commission for a valuation on 22 January 1629, when he was asked to provide a written report for the town of Haarlem on whether the prison cell of the painter Johannes Torrentius (c. 1588-1644) was suitable as a painter's workshop. Torrentius had been imprisoned for his membership in the banned brotherhood of Rosicrucians.222It seems likely that Frans Hals also dealt in paintings as a sideline, as documented for many Dutch painters from Rembrandt to Vermeer, and specifically in Haarlem for Frans Pietersz. de Grebber, Jan Miense Molenaer (1609/10-1668), Pieter de Molijn and Allart van Everdingen (1621-1675). For example, Hals bought several paintings at an auction in 1629 that had been organized by the painters Frans Pietersz. de Grebber and Andries Snellinck (1587-1653). His brother Dirck acted as guarantor for his purchases. In 1634 Hals successfully bid on a painting by Hendrick Goltzius (1558-1617) in Amsterdam, which he could not pay for immediately. It remains unclear whether he ever received it.223Two petitions in the painters' guild are known to have been supported by Hals. One concerned a collection of funds in 1638 to benefit the impoverished painter Polydanus, who was to receive a bed and bare necessities for being admitted to the Old Mens Almshouse. Another one dates from November 1642 and concerned a ‘recommendation to the mayor of Haarlem about the “entirely absurd and unfounded” application by the board of St Luke's Guild to restrict auctions of paintings’.224 Hals signed this missive together with Frans Pietersz. de Grebber, Cornelis van Kittensteyn (1597-1652), Salomon van Ruysdael (c. 1600/1603-1670), and Cornelis Hendriksz. Vroom (c. 1590/1592-1661). The problem was an oversupply of paintings that was to be restricted in the interest of the more affluent members of the guild. However, the painters who earned less were dependent on turnover that was as high as possible. Clearly, Hals belonged to the latter. His partisanship is also reason to believe that he received an indispensable part of his income from the sale of works for the open market. However, the petition argued that ‘liefhebbers’ would no longer be able to compete with the dealers driving up prices, and that new artists would not have an opportunity to sell.225In 1635 and 1642, Hals was reminded to pay his overdue annual fee to the guild. This repeated lateness did not stand in the way of him being elected ‘vinder’, that is, board member of the Guild of St Luke, on 18 January 1644. Nevertheless, Frans Hals ‘was guild official for only one year. Most of his fellow painters, like Salomon de Bray, Hendrick Pot, Pieter de Molijn and Pieter Saenredam, served many terms as dean or warden’.226Hals's production of pictures began in 1611 and can be traced until shortly before his death in 1666, spanning five and a half decades. The number and category of paintings that have been preserved varies per year: there are years without dated or datable pictures and others with one or two group pictures as well as a number of single portraits and genre scenes. Therefore, what has been preserved must only be a part of what Hals has created originally. In order to cover his and his family's living costs as well as material and rent for the house and the workshop – especially during the years when his family grew – Hals needed to generate a multiple of the 200 guilders annuity that he was to receive in his old age from the town of Haarlem beginning in late 1662. The only documented rental sum from Hals’s life can be found in the legal dispute between Hals and the widow of Willem Tas. In the court documents of 3 February 1640, payment for the month of May is mentioned as 66 guilders.227 It is not clear whether this was the current rent or a special agreement. Nevertheless, we can conclude that each month the painter needed a three figure sum of guilders at a minimum. How many pictures did he have to make and sell in order to reach this level?...

... s for different genres and artists. A nice example is offered by the set of tables with prices for various picture genres, subject matter and artists, that was published by Alan Chong in 1987.237 However, less is known about the production costs for portraits, which were directly tied to an individual and had only limited resale value. Just a single figure has been preserved in connection to a portrait commission for Hals, concerning the sum of 60 guilders paid by the Amsterdam civic guardsmen in 1633 (A2.11), plus a promised future payment of six guilders per person.238 This payment however, referred to a portrait in full-length and was set in connection with a contract involving additional costs, due to the location in a neighboring town. Hals receiving the commission was a great honor, since such commissions were usually restricted to local painters, or in the case of Amsterdam, painters based in the actual district. Hals's successful younger competitor in Amsterdam, Johannes Cornelisz. Verspronck (1601/03-1662), also received 60 guilders in 1658 for his portrait of the priest Augustinus Bloemaert (1585-1659), as a three quarter figure seated with both hands visible [37]. Indeed, this is also the only document for Verspronck's commission prices.239In the meantime, a second price has been found for Hals's portraits. Research into the architectural history of the Hofje van Heythuysen, a residential building for people in need, produced a receipt ‘to Frans Hals for a portrait of Heythuysen’ for 36 guilders. The amount was paid in 1653 for the portrait in the hofje's Regents' room (A3.24). The complex had been erected after Heythuysen's death in 1650 with funds bequeathed from his estate. The executors must have supplied the original picture from Heythuysen's private home for Hals's workshop in order to create a copy. This picture was bought from the hofje by the Brussels Royal Museum of Fine Arts of Belgium in 1870. For a long time it was considered to be the original, but there are weaknesses in the detail compared to the earlier model. As in most cases of such replicas, it was therefore not executed by Hals himself but rather by an assistant in his workshop. Under the prevailing circumstances this would not necessarily have meant a reduction in price.240...

... raitist in the exhibition catalogue Dutch portraits of 2007-2008. The following estimates could be established for:...

... l figure: 100 to 150 guilders, probably depending on the extent of accessories;Replicas of existing portraits: 50-75% of the price.241...

... aep that were probably painted in 1651 or shortly thereafter could also not be identified, nor can three more portraits of relatives from the same family that were painted by Jan Hals. In 1661, the inventory of Willem van Campen, Regent of the Amsterdam orphanage, lists his portrait by Hals. It is not identifiable. Contemporary reports mention a portrait by Hals of the preacher Jan Ruyll, also unidentified so far.246Later sources list several additional sitters that cannot be matched with existing portraits today, for example that of the Haarlem painter Leendert van der Cooghen (1632-1681) in a sale catalogue of 1708,247 or of the Brussels painter David Teniers II (1610-1690) in an exhibition catalogue of 1878.248 On 20 April 1779 a Denial of St Peter attributed to Frans Hals was sold at auction in The Hague for 17 guilders, and on 20 March 1854 a Magdalen was auctioned in Antwerp.249 With the distance in time increasing to the period of origin, the attributions of these last two paintings are certainly questionable. But even if they are indeed wrongly attributed, we must keep in mind that Hals’s production was possibly more varied and comprised a lot more than we are able to imagine on the basis of what has been preserved. Today, the existing body of work created by Hals consists of just under 200 paintings that are either fully or partly autograph. In addition, there is a group of another c. 200 works created in the artist’s workshop, including replicas that were presumably also executed in Hals’s workshop. If we attribute only one autograph painting per month to the master himself, over an active period of 50 years, we would already be calculating three times the surviving oeuvre....

A1.13 - A1.23

... Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa, 1622...

... itter's age, the dates fit with Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa (1586-1643), whose face was painted by Hals in other paintings, especially in the very well preserved portrait of 1626 (A2.7), the double portrait in Amsterdam (A2.8) and the small portrait of 1635 (A4.1.11), equally rubbed, and the engraving after the lost model for this picture (C27). The ...

... therefore demanded by temperance and an individual's personal harmony. The chalk marks on the panel in the background of Young woman holding a glass and a flagon, keeping tally of the number of glasses ordered refer to the need for temperance as well. Harmony could also be suggested by the violin hanging from the back wall. As a symbol of vanity, it points to the fading of enchanting sounds. With her smile, the youthful pourer in the tavern herself embodies the swift passing of emotional experiences. This being said, Hals’s painting goes beyond mere moral instruction. The up-close and spontaneous human face is the center of attention. The woman’s half-smile expressing shyness and approachability was probably typical for the young woman who posed for Hals. Today, the painting remains a vivid image of direct human attention....

... e Utrecht painters’ strong lighting and sculptural modelling of similar moving half-length figures from the period between 1621 and 1623. The model of the Lute player also appears in a very similar facial study, the painting of the so-called Jonker Ramp, dated 1623 [3]. The slanting light and the view from below already feature there. However, the composition of the Lute player and the emphasis on the volume of head and hands are closer to the models from the Utrecht paintings.The workshop-copy in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, which was long considered to be an original work by Frans Hals himself, is listed in catalogue part B (B4)....

... Portrait of Johan van Heemskerck of 1628 which also shows him in a jacket with colorful embroidery and slashing.13 The most famous work by Van Heemskerck is the Pub. Ovidii Nasonis Minne-kunst […], which was based on Ovid’s Ars amatoria.14 De Winkel states: ‘The cavalier by Hals must have been intimately familiar with the text of Heemskerck’s Minne-kunst, since all the emblems (on his costume, ed.) reflect the text literally. For instance, the central motif of the caduceus with flames [...] stands for Heemskerck’s central belief that eloquence was the main weapon in the art of love. [...] In fact all emblems on the sleeve relating to love can be found in the book’.15This portrait with its rich content underwent an astonishing career. As an icon of eternal ‘Art’ in the 20th century, it was reproduced on lamp shades, cushion covers, beer mats, postcards and posters worldwide. The change in the portrait’s perception is reflected in the sale prices, beginning with an auction in The Hague in 1770 at 180 guilders (where a landscape by Jan Griffier (1651/52-1718) realized 435 guilders, a landscape by Nicolaes Berchem (1621/22-1683) 1.265 guilders and a Jan van Huijsum (1682-1749) still life 2.100 guilders).16 In 1783 Hals's painting brought 247 guilders (a Berchem in the same auction was sold for 3.000), in 1800 it achieved 300 guilders in Amsterdam, 700 in 1822, again in Amsterdam, and finally in Paris in 1865 the record price at the time: 51.000 francs, while the guilder and the franc were almost at parity.17...

... n added, which is darker than in Hals’s example – as goes for the moustache as well. It is possible that this painting was a fashionable adaptation, comparable to several other cases where the wide brimmed hat was ...

... ree details. Unfortunately, the facial part was subsequently smoothed out, similar to what can be observed in the pendant. A slightly brownish tone now distinguishes the skin of the face from that of the hands – the latter having been preserved in their original condition. However, the observation of the increasing and decreasing brightness in the modelling of the hands and the clothing, and their translation into graduated strokes and patches of color can be followed here in an exemplary manner. A juxtaposition with similarly composed depictions by contemporary colleagues [5][6], shows Hals's sensitivity, paired with the sketchy lightness of his paint application. Hals’s Portrait of Jacob Pietersz. Olycan may have served as a source of inspiration for the 1632 Portrait of a man, by the Amsterdam painter Nicolaes Eliasz. Pickenoy (1588-1650).18...

... e area of the head is severely abraded and was probably already smoothed shortly after it was painted. This is what makes the impression of the face of the just 19-year-old Aletta Hanemans so flat and mask-like. The edge of the chin is scuffed, as is the facial contour on the left side, which is unconvincingly overlapped by the light grey of the bonnet – especially at the level of the eyes. From the root of the nose down to the chin, the facial features have been robbed of the accents that otherwise suggest the delicate movement of facial expression. This loss is contrasted by the breath-taking lightness of the well-preserved depiction of the hands, cuffs, gloves and embroidery of the bodice, as well as the delicate portrayal of the lace. Hals's incredible skill in capturing these intricate forms, soft fabrics and threads becomes ever so clear when compared with similar motifs in the Portrait of Johanna Le Maire, painted by Nicolaes Eliasz. Pickenoy (1588-1650) in about the same period [7]....

... 9...

... 26...

... f psychological presence and lively eye movement.21 In contrast, the painting fits typically into Hals’s type portraiture from 1625; it demonstrates his confident study of moving, and appealing features. Dirt, overpainting and unequal cleaning have affected the appearance of the picture over time. A...

... 8...

... 26...

... ion in the meantime would exclude this frame as an original one for the present painting. It was probably used when the painting’s size was reduced, if the picture was not cut down in the first place to fit the smaller frame. The changes of dimensions have caused a notable shift in the composition. The sitter is placed distinctly to the left of the center, leaving an unusual amount of space on the right towards the pendant. This impression is enhanced by the strip measuring about 4,5 cm in width, which runs along the right hand edge of the painting and differs in color with its grey overpainting. In some places, the original background shade can be seen through the overpainting, indicating that the strip of canvas is in fact original. The same color of overpainting is also visible along the other painting edges. Smoothing retouches carried out in the face, on the collar, at the upper edge of the left cuff and on both hands were probably also part of the same intervention process.While the paint layer is well-preserved overall and displays Hals’s brushwork in many places, it is disturbed by overpainting – on the ear, the eyelids, around the nose, mouth and chin, but also the clumsy second upper edge of the cuff. The general impression of the portrait would markedly improve if these additions were to be removed....

... 26...

... om there to the English trade, while Van Baersdorp’s portrait turned up in the French art trade in 1899. However, by then, there was a conspicuous difference: instead of the original 117.5 x 75 cm, the painting now measured 116 x 91 cm, and the canvas was laid down on panel. A broadening by 16 cm was not due to an added piece, but obviously to the inclusion of the preserved canvas that was folded back over the stretcher. The restoration of the female portrait’s original size somewhere between 1825 and 1899 anticipated the much later reconstruction of the male portrait. The original, and today relined, canvas has cusping on all four sides, with irregularly cut edges. Only narrow strips would have been lost. An examination of the present canvas at the restorer’s workshop also revealed rows of earlier nail holes.34 An initial inspection of the distance between the assumed painting edges of the canvas with the strips folded back, resulted in an approximate width of c. 74-75 cm, which matches the size of the male pendant as described in the 1902 catalogue of the Royal Academy exhibition.35...

3.2 Changing perceptions of Frans Hals

... burghers provided many commissions for Hals’s outstanding abilities in painting portraits. Yet, with few exceptions his clientele remained within the confines of Haarlem, and the appreciation of his achievements was limited, due to the low ‘artistic’ standing of portrait and genre painting at the time....

... , annunciations to shepherds, angels or crucifixions and resurrections; never did he paint voluptuous and bestial naked women. He painted portraits; nothing nothing nothing but that. Portraits of soldiers, gatherings of officers […]. He painted guttersnipes and laughing urchins, he painted musicians and he painted a fat cook. He doesn’t know much more than that, but it’s well worth Dante’s Paradise and the Michelangelos and Raphaels and even the Greeks. It’s beautiful like Zola, and healthier and more cheerful, but just as alive, because his epoch was healthier and less sad.’179From a historical perspective, it is ironic that ‘voluptuous and bestial naked women’ actually did come rather close to Frans Hals in the end, in the shape of two bronze muses on the plinth of the monument erected in his honor by his hometown of Haarlem in 1900 [7]. Created by the sculptor Henri Scholtz (1868-1904), it shows Hals in double life-size, proudly erect, with a palette in his hand and gazing into the distance. One of the female figures holds sheets of drawing paper, the other, equally scantily clad, a few roses [8]. At the time, academic allegories such as these seemed to be the sole means of conveying that the painter had been elevated to the higher sphere of ‘the arts’. Both would have been unthinkable for Frans Hals the historical figure, be it ‘art’ as timeless and removed from content, or a monument to himself. In his own century, the latter was reserved for military commanders and princes. Allegorical figures on the plinth were also at odds with Hals the sober observer, whose gaze on life appears most clearly in sitters from the fringes of contemporary society such as Peeckelhaering (A1.50, A1.51) or Malle Babbe (A1.103)....

... th in his paintings and his widespread engravings. Nevertheless, portraits by the two Dutch masters shared a common destiny that warrants a closer look. They faded, as long as they were understood in their original intention. With each new generation, different events, people and objects moved to center stage. Over time, all inherited objects become gradually removed from the immediate sphere of living, and their purpose follows changes in requirements. In the long term, this happened to most 17th-century paintings, even if their message was to last beyond the day, such as philosophical instruction and moral guidance, or as powerful portraits of remembrance for formerly esteemed or feared figures. ‘Their very survival [was] subject to the vagaries of fortune as time and circumstance removed them from the original purposes for which they were made‘, as Frances S. Jowell wrote about Hals’ portraits and genre paintings.182 Very few remained untouched, nearly all lost their original frames, some were changed in format, others partly overpainted as they were adapted to some new decorative purpose. Restoration protocols supply a rich picture of the unselfconscious handling of preserved pictures. The catalogue part of the present publication lists the most severe operations on the pieces that were passed down to us. However, the largest part of the paintings that had become old-fashioned and unsightly was thrown out like other unused furniture, or left to slowly decay in attics or cellars, most likely a multiple of what is conserved today....

... would be received and official dinners were held’.184 In 1715, the picture was moved for improved security to the Amsterdam Town Hall. Since many other civic guard and regents paintings also needed to be stored there, the available wall space soon became too small. Rembrandt’s painting was cut on three sides in order to precisely fit its new place in the Small War Council Chamber, and today it measures only 363 by 437 centimeters. ‘Until it was moved to a proper museum in 1815,185 the large canvas always hung in spaces that were used for various purposes. It looked down on hundreds of meetings of military men and politicians, receptions, auctions and other events of the kind that take place in banquet halls and government offices. It is no surprise that it was damaged. Conservators have counted sixty-three different tears and holes in the canvas’.186...

... Chase, Mary Cassat, Alden Weir, John Singer Sargent, Max Liebermann and Lovis Corinth also took the trouble to personally copy works by Hals. However, even only a thorough study of Hals's painting had an unmistakable effect on a number of other painters. For example, Édouard Manet had visited Amsterdam and Haarlem in June 1872. When he exhibited his painting Le Bon Bock [17] in May 1873 at the annual Paris Salon, art critic Albert Wolff (1835-1891) remarked in the Figaro that the painter had ‘poured water into his bock beer’, thus tempering his aggressive style of painting.189 The painter Alfred Stevens (1823-1906) commented on this return to Old Master technique as follows: ‘Why water, it is pure Haarlem beer’. Other contemporaries took similar views of Hals's effect on this work by Manet, though he himself was offended by the comment.190Manet's picture shows the engraver Émile Bellot smoking his pipe in the Café Guerbois with a glass of beer in his hand. Hals's example is noticeable not so much in the brushwork as in the handling of the muted greys of the suit and in the momentary observation: the alert face with the slightly raised right eyebrow is turned towards the viewer. Simply comparing the passage around Bellot's eyes and that of Hals's Merry Drinker (A1.49) illustrates the connection between these works [18][19]. Manet's concentration on an ‘eloquent’ moment in combination with a painting technique that becomes less emphasized and more two-dimensional towards the edges is close to Hals's works, though focusing on an atmospheric painterly impression of what is seemingly unintentionally perceived, instead of the representative presentation in Hals's commissioned works and the demonstrative gestures in his genre paintings. This is tonal painting similar to other Realist painters such as Wilhelm Leibl, but also Salon painters such as Alfred Stevens and Mihály von Munkácsy....

... l-life 2100 florins and a Jan van der Heyden was carried away for 1305 florins. At Locquet’s sale in 1783 at Amsterdam the portrait brought 247 florins, not an impressive price when we learn that an Asselyn fetched 626 florins and a Berchem was sold for 3000 florins.’205 At the Gildemeester auction in Amsterdam in 1800 the Laughing Cavalier fetched three hundred guilders, at the Brentano sale in the same town in 1822 it was 700 guilders, after all.206 The buyer in that sale, Comte de Pourtalès, was able to sell it in 1865 for the abovementioned price, another seventy-fold increase.207Such a result indicated the new caliber of ‘art’ as a universal event for humanity. Over the 18th century, man-made objects had gained a new currency that replaced the former ‘arts’ of representation. What fell into this category could achieve prices that could no longer be estimated by the masters of the painters guilds, who had been entrusted with valuations of pictures in the ‘old times’. Writers and ‘art’ critics had now taken on this task. Indeed, on 18 March 1782 a picture by the contemporary Jean-Baptiste Greuze, L'Accordée de village [25], whom Diderot had held in great esteem, achieved a price of 16.690 francs in Paris.208 At the same auction, Hals's Young woman [26] was still sold for 301 francs, a 55th part of the aforementioned sum.209 Today, both works are on display in the Louvre. Greuze's work was bought for the French Royal Collection in 1782, Hals's picture came into what was by then the national art collection through a donation in 1869.21020th-century sale figures in the millions merely demonstrate value shifts within the modern cultural segment of ‘Art’; they have become extreme today after more and more objects entered museums and thus moved out of the market's reach. Any high-level valuation of such testimonies to eternal ‘art’ is detached from the pre-modern market for those more or less expressive and thoughtful portraits and genre portraits whose low and hardly variable prices provided Hals with an income. It was an entirely different, narrowly limited, and hierarchically structured world that becomes evident in Hals's and his clients' personal circumstances....

1.3 Collaborations with other artists

... sed on a well-considered concept. Hals may have presented designs for the scenery, but hardly more than that. Eddy de Jongh already underlined the priority of the patron in his detailed analysis: ‘Obviously, responsibility for the iconographical program of the wedding portrait must be attributed to the patron rather than the painter. It is well-known that patrons typically commented on or gave instructions regarding the content of the portrait to be executed. [...] With regard to learning, Frans Hals must have accepted Massa’s superiority, since his own oeuvre generally made only economical use of symbolical elements’.6...

... 1626).7 These feature leaf shapes that are typical for Molijn, the smaller ones created by pressing down a frayed flat brush in a manner that is more stamped than painted [14] [15], and sometimes by dabbing the dry front edge of a flat brush [16] [17]. Once this trademark style of the second participant has been recognized, and compared with his works from the same period, it suddenly become noticeable in other works by Hals and his workshop, but also in the 1627 Garden party by Dirck Hals (1591-1656) of which the full upper half was executed by Molijn [18]. There, we can observe larger leaves which still retain the same stamped-like appearance, but which are applied with separate strokes of a flatly applied pointed brush [19] [20] [21]. Additionally, in the present double portrait, the difference between Molijn’s tree backdrop and an area of foliage clear...

... In front of this shaded backdrop in generally muted colors, the brightly lit heads and hands of the two sitters stand out, but also the illuminated tree trunk above them. This effect is created with vigorously applied impasto brushstrokes. Such an effective improvisation can only be attributed to Frans Hals and constitutes his only surviving still life, apart from the rose at the feet of the slightly earlier Portrait of Willem van Heythuysen (A2.6) [23] [24]....

... ’s country house Honselaarsdijk [25]. The composition of this brilliant work, and especially the motif of the tree behind the figures, lit from the left at an angle, are so close to Hals’s double portrait that a coincidence seems unlikely [26] [27]. This means that Hals probably visited Honthorst’s workshop in 1625, where he was able to see the painting. This event would create a terminus post quem for Hals’s Portrait of Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa and Beatrix van der Laen. The style of the faces, as well as the fashion of the attire fit in with the period of 1626-1627 and not 1622 – the wedding year of the couple which was suggested by De Jongh as a probable date for the painting, and was repeated in subsequent l...

A2.0 - A2.8

... is Vroom, Banquet of the officers of the St George civic guard, 1616...

... ighest-ranking member, Colonel van Berckenrode (1). In addition, his face and hand suffered most from later cleaning and retouching [2][3]. All other faces show Hals’s striking emphases; his brushwork appears most clearly in the heads in the center and the right hand side of the composition. The color accents in the face of ensign Jacob Cornelisz. Schout, left of center (10) [4], his colleagues standing outer right (9, 11) [5] [6] and the two lieutenants seated behind the table (6, 7) [7][8] are unthinkable without a previous encounter with the work of Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) and Jacob Jordaens (1593-1678) in Antwerp. The landscape as seen through the window in the background, with its greenish-brown tone and the evenly rendered round leaves, displays an independent manner which differs from the style of the Hals workshop. The colors, as well as the shape of the foliage and branches, connect this part of the painting to the Haarlem landscape painter Cornelis Vroom (c. 1591-1661).Two anonymous chalk drawings after the composition are preserved in the Teylers Museum in Haarlem. One of them bears the date 1720 on the back and shows a composition that is larger on the right, whilst a horizontal strip is missing on the top (D78). This suggests that the original group portrait may have been cut down on the right by approximately 25 cm.In the literature, Anne van Grevenstein, Norbert Middelkoop and Koos Levy-van Halm give an overview of the history of the present painting’s storage, preservation and restoration, and they discuss the most recent restoration that took place June to December 1986.4 An illustration shown by Grevenstein and Middelkoop provides a striking demonstration of a fact pertaining to all pictures from past centuries: the irreversible changes in color, which lead to an overall darker and more contrasting impression, while delicate transitions have faded and certain colors have disappeared completely, such as the copper green of the curtain on the left which became reddish brown.5...

... cal brushwork is recognizable from the collar downwards; both lace collars as well as the clothes underneath and especially the man’s hands are typical and virtuoso achievements in Hals’s confident brushstrokes. The connections between Pieter Soutman and the Beresteyn family (see below, cat.no. A2.2) suggest an attribution of the faces to this artist.8 In comparison to the manner of Hals, they are rendered smoother and softer. A remarkable detail are the pentimenti on the right and above the area of the man’s head, which seems to have been lowered at a later stage, perhaps in order to establish a better balance with the woman’s portrait.It is certainly unusual and even ironical that two three-quarter length figures in expensive clothing were executed by Frans Hals, while the faces were commissioned from a colleague....

... mily, especially that of the girl on the lower right [11], are also close to the facial in the present picture. From today’s perspective, it seems hard to imagine that a well-known portrait painter would leave the central part of his composition to a colleague. In this instance, a temporary sojourn by Soutman in Haarlem may be an explanation. His family and relatives lived there. During such a visit he would not have had his own workshop and may only have had limited time to paint from life. Under these circumstances he could have cooperated with his colleague Hals and ceded some of his work for his prosperous clients to him....

... ert Claesz. van Campen, Maria Joris and their children, c. 1623-16...

... t Claesz. van Campen and Maria Joris, c. 1623-1625...

... laesz. van Campen and Maria Joris, c. 1623-1625...

... cially that in the Meeting of the officers and sergeants of the Calivermen civic guard of 1632/1633 (A2.10) – we may assume the present picture’s original appearance to have been much lighter overall and more differentiated in its three-dimensionality. The fact that the portrait was painted in the studio is indicated by the absence of recognizable outside lighting, especially in the depiction of the figures. There is only the muted light of an interior space.The prototype for a painting of a family as a group resting outside can be found in Flemish painting. There are several models, including depictions of the Rest on the Flight into Egypt and idyllic Arcadian scenes. In this instance, the father is seated next to a stone covered in ivy. His wife leans on him and, as a mother, gestures to the surrounding group of children, reaching as far as the children with the goat cart, preserved in the Brussels fragment (A2.4). The motif of the goat cart is part of the overall allegorical concept of a group of people dwelling in Arcadian fields. Contemporary viewers were presented with a spiritual and visionary content, as was the custom for erudite paintings at the time. While there are individual portraits of the respective family members, they form a group joined by an experience of particular unity, virtue and tranquility. The parents are resting in front of a vigorous tree of life; ivy – a symbol of consistency – is wrapped around its roots. The motif of the goat cart balances out the main figure group on the left. This arrangement would recur repeatedly in Dutch painting, with examples painted by artists ranging from Jan Daemen Cool (c. 1589-1660) in 1631 to Adriaen van de Velde (1636-1672) in 1655.17 A related composition with only children in a goat cart was painted in 1654 by Ferdinand Bol (1616-1680).18Around 1620, Arcadian motifs started to appear in paintings by the Utrecht artists Abraham Bloemaert (1566-1651) and Paulus Moreelse (1571-1638), for example in portraits which depict the sitters as shepherd or shepherdess. However, Hals’s present painting seems to be an early and independent example of this genre. It is not clear whether the patron exerted any influence on the design of this representation. It is conceivable that for such an unprecedented large family portrait, the concept was worked out jointly by several people, perhaps also by especially learned advisors.The composition of the present painting was followed in some unidentified family paintings from the Hals workshop which were painted during the 1640s (A4.3.19, A4.3.24), but also influenced others such as Pieter Soutman (1593/1601-1657) in the Beresteyn family portrait of c. 1630.19 Above all, the full-length double portrait in the Rijksmuseum (A2.8) features an adaptation of the two parents’ figures. Hals’s left half of the painting also reverberates in an anonymous family portrait dated 1632.20...

... 26...

... the small figures and the garden hedge in the background is not very detailed, so that there are only approximate indicators for an attribution. Nevertheless, the style of painting differs from that of Hals and is probably that of Pieter de Molijn (1595-1661), for whom the small figures would be characteristic. It is conceivable that this small background garden was the inspiration for the larger garden composition in the Portrait of Isaac Massa and Beatrix van der Laen (A2.8). As in that painting, individual insertions of virtuoso quality stand out from the schematic representation of the hedge in the background. The loosely rendered single flower and leaf at Heythuysen’s feet prove to be final accents that may originate from Hals’s own hand [16][17].In 1789 the portrait was mentioned in a panegyric on te occasion of the award ceremony at the Haarlem drawing academy.24 It was sold in Haarlem in 1800 for the low price of 51 guilders and purchased by Prince Johann I Josef of Liechtenstein (1760-1836) in 1821 as created by Bartholomeus van der Helst (c. 1613-1670).25 Waagen corrected the attribution in 1866.26 In 1969, the painting was sold for 12 million Deutschmarks to the Bavarian State Collections.27The paint surface is well-preserved overall. There are considerable losses to the original shaping in the details of the facial and the collar. The areas of the hair and the moustache, but also the eyes, mouth, nose and cheeks are severely abraded. The left hand on the hip is partly retouched....

... Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa, 1626...

... 26Toronto, Art Gallery of Ontario, inv.no. 54/31Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa (1586-1643) was a widely travelled, highly educated ...

... Isaac Abrahamsz. Massa and Beatrix van der Laen, c. 1627...

... osite world to the marital sphere in the foreground, based on the subject matter of the temple, fountain, and peacock and the clothing and behavior of the couples appearing there. The marital sphere is demarcated by the clay pots on the right and the ivy vines in front.36 The painterly style in the area of the trees – with the exception of the ivy at the feet and between the heads of the sitters – and the figures sauntering in the right hand background differs from Hals’s manner and is closer to that of Pieter de Molijn (1595-1661). A drawing by the latter, dated by Beck to c. 1625-1626, depicts a similar elegant couple and may have been created in preparation of the present painting [19][20]. A suitable comparison for the rendering of the foliage can be found in Prince Maurits and Prince Frederik Hendrik going to the chase, 1625 [21] [22].37 Awareness of the detailed symbolical program of the present double portrait suggests the presence of a well-considered concept involving the patron and further advisers. While Hals and De Molijn may have created the designs for the scenery, they were most likely not the sole originators. Up-close observations of the working sequence in this painting are described by Bezold, who also points out that parts of the background match the landscape in the 1627 Garden party by Dirck Hals (1591-1656).38 Within the landscape setting of the portrait of Massa and Van der Laen, the two illuminated vines of ivy at the feet of the sitters and between their heads have been rendered in the same loose manner as the single rose and leaf at the feet of Willem van Heythuyzen in his full-length portrait in Munich (A2.6) – a style different from De molijn’s. These can be recognized as contributions by Hals himself.Unfortunately, since the restoration of 1984, the damage in the paint layers in the lower left corner emerge in noticeable light patches....

A1.45 - A1.58

... ensional volume, this portrait is typical for the period around 1630. The sitter is placed rather tightly within the composition and it remains to be examined whe...

... 5...

... 6...

... n. Also the merely fluidly sketched hand corresponds to this assessment.4Valentiner's suggestion of a possible pendant in the Portrait of Cunera van Baersdorp (A1.23) cannot be upheld.5 Body posture and proportions do not match, and the female portrait is definitely earlier in style. The matching canvas sizes can often be attributed rather to a similarity in loom width and the utilization of available materials rather than to a matching of pendants. The high loss ratio of surviving pictures makes a discovery of a matching pendant a rare occasion...

... nt sitter is close to the two Peeckelhaering paintings. The medal on the man's chest shows a portrait which was identified as that of Prince Maurice of Orange (1567-1625) by Hofstede de Groot.8 The meaning of this, however, remains to be interpreted. Even though Hals's genre scenes were clearly based on the appearance of their sitters, they are above all a mirror of human emotions and conditions. Therefore, The merry drinker is not a portrait commemorating a civic guard member for posterity, as suggested by the title of the picture in the most recent catalogue of the Rijksmuseum.9The painting had been bought for the newly founded Rijksmuseum as early as 1816 and was thus one of the earliest acquisitions of a work by Hals for a Netherlandish museum. Its comparatively high price at the time was 325 guilders, yet a painting by Jan Both (c.1615/1622-1652) achieved 5.610 guilders at the same auction in Warmond, near Leiden.10...

... Dyck visited The Hague. According to Houbraken's report of 1718, Hals was in a tavern when the other painter arrived.14 There, Van Dyck could have seen the Peeckelhaering painting, which inspired him to create his portrait of the art dealer François Langlois (1588-1647), painted during the same period [4].15 Karolien de Clippel was the first to notice the fascinating dependence of Van Dyck's unusual portrait on Hals's Peeckelhaering.16 Even the unusual spelled-out signature on Hals’ painting could find an explanation in the public exhibition: ‘then every literate person who came into the inn would know who had painted the picture’.17 Whether Peeckelhaering actually hung in the tavern and remained there for thirty years and more, cannot be verified. It reappeared first as no. 363 in the 1749 inventory of the Kurhessische Gemäldegalerie in Kassel.18...

... ance Hals’, his works as such were appreciated, as several copies demonstrate. Slive mentions a Merry Andrew, possibly the present picture, in a London sale in 1765. The price of 10 shillings, 10 pence would present a negative record.21The composition of the present painting is related to that of a workshop painting, where the figure in the foreground appears to be a reversed variant of Peeckelhaering’s posture [6]. This painting depicts two laughing boys, the one in front holding a coin. In my monograph of 1972 I had therefore assumed that the indistinct hand of Peeckelhaering was caused by overpainting a corresponding representation.22 In the meantime, restoration has revealed the original finger movement: the hand gesture is disparaging, with an outstretched finger – ‘not worth sticking your finger out’. Blankert pointed to the adoption of this gesture in representations of the laughing philosopher Democritus.23 The stylistic features of the workshop painting also match the supposed date of the Leipzig painting date of c. 1630-1631. The former is reproduced in reverse in a mezzotint by Wallerant Vaillant (1623-1677) (C21)....

... 8...

... 9...

... 0...

... he hairline and the transition between the forehead and the white cap indistinct. In the same way, the pattern of the dark dress has become faint. The surface structure of the millstone collar has also become flattened through abrasion. Yet, all areas that are visible today can be attributed to Hals's confident capture of nuances....

... n Hals's faces, which specifically creates more angular shadows, especially around the nose and mouth. The master’s brushwork has thus reached another level of independence, even in commissioned portraits....

... anion piece. One exception from the usual simultaneous creation of pendants would only be the De Clercq and Van Steenkiste pair (A1.42, A1.72A). Only the examination of the canvases in Washington and New York, and analysis of the pigments used in the backgrounds – which should be similar in both instance – can confirm or reject the hypothesis more definitely.The Portrait of a woman, whose posture is similar to that of Cornelia Claesdr. Vooght of 1631 (A3.20), does suggest a matching male counterpart was created as a companion piece. However, is is highly unlikely that the missing pendant can be found among the surviving works known today, which only represent a small part of Hals’s original production....

... her-beaten. It is interesting that this man upheld a personal connection with Hals: together with the engraver Matham, he became the godfather of Hals's daughter Susanna in 1634.27Sadly, the painting’s paint layer is abraded and flattened throughout by lining of the canvas. Hals’s free brushstrokes are unfortunately only partly preserved in the sitter’s facial features, which are characterized by a lifetime of adventure. The comparison between Matham’s engraving and the painting in its present condition clearly demonstrates the loss in clear modelling along the folds of the dark clothing, in particular in the sleeves. The small amounts of lead white added to the different shades of grey have lost most of their opacity....

A4.2.1 The rommel-pot player

... be imagined having been a colored sketch on paper, similar to the modelli for engravings. It would have remained in the workshop together with the other studies and compositional sketches, while the finished pictures were sold and went out of reach.7 In 1792, another drawing by Bailly was offered at auction in Utrecht, also dated 1624 and described as ‘[…] Boontje […] in those days a well-known fool in Haarlem, playing the Rommel-pot’.8 If these pieces of the puzzle actually fit together, not only a likely date is set for the creation of these motifs, but also the content of the depiction can be identified more precisely. Boontje is marked as a fool by the fox's tail. The provoking noise of the rommel-pot – created by moving a stick that has been poked through a pig’s bladder which has been stretched over a pot or jug – is reminiscent of the grunting of pigs. The horrible sound is beloved only by children. As the inscription on Jan van de Velde’s (1593-1641) engraving (C5) – which renders Hals’s figure in a slight variation – describes it: ‘Many fools run around at Shrovetide / To make a half-penny grunt on a Rommel-pot’.9 The subject would then be the foolishness of the world, complemented by the theme of robbing the fool who collects pennies from children. The grinning man that was captured in such a pointed way is unlikely to have been created by Hals on the basis of some random model sketches. An exact likeness of a living troublemaker is more probable, captured by Hals in the same way as in the Portrait of Pieter Cornelisz. van der Morsch (A1.3), Verdonck (A1.34) and Malle Babbe (A1.103)....

... shwork [2][3]. Therefore, both paintings must be considered to be workshop contributions that followed the same design. In addition, in both versions the faces and hands of the children are painted distinctly more cursorily than the main figure’s, while differing among themselves in quality of execution. This could indicate that there was an obligatory and precisely detailed model of the protagonist that had to be repeated exactly. Everything else could have been handled more freely....

... ister), 5 December 2018, lot 301Rather coarse repetition....

... is, 8 May 1908, lot 3913...

... t, in its turn, erroneously refers to the 1989-1990 exhibition catalogue, where in fact our cat.no. A4.2.1b is discussed....

... ecution approaches that of the faces in the Van Campen family picture (A2.3, A2.4, A2.5) and suggests the direct influence of an immediate model by Hals. The coarser execution of the remaining faces in the present painting is thus recognizable as an effort of the workshop, based on less detailed models. It does not seem possible to me to identify the separate hands of the assistants who may have been involved....

... n be categorized as a product by the Hals workshop, especially considering the coloring and the typical painterly style. It is therefore also relevant to note that the signature forms part of the original paint layer and is therefore ‘authentic’. Only one other known version (A4.2.1f) also carries Hals’s ligated monogram.16On the occasion of the Hals exhibition in Haarlem in 1990, Ella Hendriks and Koos Levy-van Halm undertook an examination of the exhibited paintings, the results of which are documented in an unpublished manuscript, kept at the RKD.17 Based on their observations of the painterly execution of the other version of the present composition (A4.2.1a), a similar painting process would be expected in the other variants. It would be interesting to compare the areas that differ between them, as deviations from the given standard composition may perhaps also be found in the underdrawings or initial sketches....

... ackground and part of the wall above, which only appear in the variant that was offered for sale in Munich in 2018 (A4.2.1d) and in the engraving by François Hubert (1744-1809) (C7). Remnants of the ligated monogram FH can be seen on the upper edge of the door frame....

... talogue entry as by Frans Hals, or in his manner....

... me in the collection of Charles René Dominique Sochet Destouches (1727-1793). It does not, however, seem to be featured in the 1794 sale of his collection, as was stated by Slive and Hofstede de Groot.19...

... The rommel-pot. The player is standing, holding his instrument, a group of children with smiling f...

... rinks. Stylistically, the impasto handling in the face can be dated to the mid-1630s at the earliest. The choppy contours and stripes in the hand area are reminiscent of the style in Jan Hals’s (c. 1620-c. 1654) genre paintings....

... istant or imitator of Frans Hals, Rommel-pot player with two laughing children...

... 26-1630...

... Leyster, presenting it in comparison with the Merry Trio in the Nasjonalmuseet in Oslo (A4.2.11), with which the relationship is even closer.27 The suggested date of c. 1626-1630 corresponds with the context of this attribution. Of particular interest are the gaps of time between the different versions in the rommel-pot group, which suggests the availability of sketches, a copy in color, or at least a partial copy in the w...

... ive, much smoother, brushwork and the differences in the highlights make it difficult to determine which artwork has served as the direct model for this painting.28 ...

... is des Congrès), 29-30 May 1968, lot 76...

... is de Carnolès, inv.no. R.F. 1946-37Nearly identical to the variant in The Art Institute of Chicago (A4.2.1r)...