RKD STUDIES

Abraham van Calraet DPG63, DPG65, DPG71

... il 1953, when it was reattributed to Abraham van Calraet. A similar composition by Calraet is on loan to the Rijksmuseum (Related works, no. 2). However both the cow and the background are different. While in Amsterdam the landscape seems to be Dutch, in Dulwich a hill or mountain is visible, which could point to Italy. The farms on the right also differ. In Dulwich the cow looks at us (as in Related works, no. 1, a repetition of the right half of DPG63, set against a different version of farmhouses), while in Amsterdam the cow looks straight ahead to the left. That cow appears again in a stable in pictures by Calraet in Brussels and Philadelphia (Related works, no. 3a, 3b). The DPG63 cow appears in a painting that is signed by Aelbert Cuyp, but attributed to that artist ‘and school’; there it is set, with herdsmen and other cattle, in a mountainous landscape (Related works, no. 4) [2].As early as 1858 Denning expressed doubts about the attribution to Cuyp in his manuscript catalogue of the Dulwich collection. Given its monochromatic tonalities, it is easy to understand why the attribution had been made, but the spatial arrangement of the scene in two flat planes is very unlike the work of Cuyp.The poor condition of the painting makes it difficult to be positive as to the attribution; if indeed by Calraet, it is not one of his best compositions....

... 48). DPG.214) Copy: Antoine Alphonse Montfort (as after Aelbert Cuyp), Deux cavaliers (Two Horsemen), inscribed Esquisse faite d’après un tableau de Kuyp, galerie de Dwlitch [sic] août 1848 (Sketch made after a picture by Cuyp, Dulwich Gallery, August 1848), watercolour, 207 x 315 mm. Printroom, Louvre, Paris, RF 8042 recto [4].22Lent to the RA to be copied in 1834, 1841 and 1857.Calraet’s paintings of horses derive primarily from Cuyp’s interest in the subject, but in style they reflect a knowledge of Philips Wouwerman’s hunting scenes. The white horse may be inspired by examples in Wouwerman’s works, but with its small head and stiff posture it is inferior to them. Here the palette is also more monochromatic than that of those artists. During the 19th century DPG65 was paired with DPG71, also by Calraet, although the dimensions are slightly different.Bredius in 1919 used as comparison a picture in Rotterdam (Related works, no. 2) [3] to attribute DPG65 to Calraet. Chong deems the attribution to be doubtful, while he still thinks the Rotterdam picture is by Abraham van Calraet himself. We see no reason to disagree with Bredius....

... 3, lot 50, as A. Cuyp; photo RKD).4) Copy: Ralph Cockburn, Two Horses (as Cuyp), c. 1816–20, aquatint, 300 x 402 mm (Cockburn 1830, no. 49). DPG.32Lent to the RA to be copied in 1834, 1841, 1847 and 1857.Tethered horses waiting for riders frequently appear in Calraet’s work; there are examples in Rotterdam (see under DPG65, Related works, no. 2) [3], Cambridge (Related works, no. 1) [4], and St Petersburg (Related works, no. 2) [5]. Particularly when compared to the works in Rotterdam and Cambridge, DPG71 is quite loosely painted. The handling of the tree, on the other hand, is rather similar to that in the Cambridge picture. Given the artist’s sixty-year career it seems impossible to suggest a date. During the 19th century DPG71 was paired with DPG65, also by Calraet, although the dimensions are slightly different.Writing in 1824, when the picture was attributed to Cuyp, William Hazlitt commented that ‘Nature is scarcely more faithful to itself than this delightfully unmannered, unaffected picture is to it’. Bredius first attributed DPG71 to Calraet in 1919, as Hofstede de Groot did in 1926, but it was not until 1947 that this was accepted in the DPG catalogues. As with the other paintings by Calraet at Dulwich, it has not been possible to identify the picture in Desenfans’ early inventories or sales....

Nicolaes Berchem DPG196, DPG122

... it is an early work, like DPG122 (q.v.), that similarly shows the influence of the landscape painter Cornelis Hendriksz. Vroom (1590/92–1661). Nevertheless, the central figure of the woman on a donkey – a leitmotiv of Berchem’s œuvre (see for instance Related works, no. 1a) – makes it clear that Berchem had already developed a distinctive style. A drawing in the Morgan Library is no longer considered to be a preparatory study for that picture, but rather a variation of it (Related works, no. 1b).DPG196 was attributed to Berchem in the 1813 inventory of Bourgeois’ collection, and Haydon in 1817 attributed it to ‘Berghem’, but it was given to Dujardin in the Dulwich catalogues from 1817 to 1876. Keeper Ralph Cockburn (1779–1820) made an aquatint after it, confusingly saying it was by ‘J. Both’ (Related works, no. 2) [1]. In 1876 Sparkes noticed a signature and correctly reattributed the picture to Berchem. It seems likely that DPG196 was purchased – along with several other pictures – by Desenfans and Bourgeois from the dealers at the European Museum in the opening years of the 19th century....

... §10, p. 70 (fig. 60).Lent to the RA to be copied in 1854A wooded northern landscape, in which trees occupy four-fifths of the painting. The figures, by Berchem's own hand, are relatively small. The two hunters firing a shot (lower right) add a seigneurial touch, in contrast to the peaceful atmosphere surrounding the groups of cowherds.25The form of the signature indicates an early date, the late 1640s, according to Stechow, which would be consonant with the influence discernible in the landscape, especially the trees, of the painters Cornelis Hendriksz. Vroom and Jacob van Ruisdael (himself inspired by Vroom at the time). Schaar on the other hand considers that the figures are comparable to those in the Hilly Landscape in Vienna, which is dated 1653, and the undated HdG316 (Related works, nos 1a, 1b).26This painting was praised even more highly than DPG88 at the beginning of the 19th century,27 and in general Berchem’s ‘Northern’ pictures were as influential for artists as his Italianate landscapes – including perhaps Thomas Gainsborough (1727–88), whose Cornard Wood (Related works, no. 2)[2] according to Murray owes a debt to this painting.28 Ruskin, on the other hand, in 1873 (with an illustration, Related works, no. 3) uses this work to demonstrate Turner’s superiority in rendering the structure of trees....

Johannes LINGELBACH

... ised 10 October 1622–Amsterdam, buried 3 November 1674 in the Old Lutheran ChurchDutch painter and draught...

... (1638–1709) and Jan Wijnants (1632–84).LITERATUREBurger-Wegener 1976; Kren 1982; Laureati 1983a and 1983b; Levine & Mai 1991, pp. 212–34; Laureati 1996; Schatborn 2001, pp. 124–7, 208; Saur, lxxxiv, 2015, pp. 523–4 (T. van der Molen); Van der Veen 2019c; Ecartico, no. 4651: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/4651 (June 18, 2017); RKDartists&, no. 50219: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/50219 (June 18, 2017)....

... 26 – An Italian Seaport...

... Lingelbach liked to include sculptures of mythological figures – here Neptune (see also Related works, no. 2e) [8]; another Neptune, on top of a fountain, appears in a print in his series of seaports (Related works, nos 3a, 3b). There are similarities between DPG326, the Mauritshuis picture, and a painting by Lingelbach dated 1669 (Related works, no. 2c) [6], most notably in the prow of the ship in the centre of the composition. Another picture has the same background (triumphal arch, the statue of Neptune, the prow of a ship, and harbour to the right) but completely different staffage (Related works, no. 2d) [7]. Lingelbach played many variations on the same motifs, as can be seen in three drawings that are all beach scenes like DPG326. A drawing in the Albertina features the same rider seen from the back, the person he is talking to, and the man in Moorish dress, but without the parasol (Related works, no. 1a) [2]. A drawing in the Rijksprentenkabinet includes the column on the left which partly hides the triumphal arch, the man in Moorish dress with the parasol (seen from the front, whereas in DPG326 he seen from the side), and the statue of Neptune, in a different position (Related works, no. 1b) [3]. In a drawing in the Teylers Museum the columns on the left and the figure in Moorish dress reappear, in a different composition (Related works, no. 1c) [4].It was suggested that this scene could be an allegory of Navigation, as several elements point to shipping: the statue of Neptune, the prow of the ship with the armillary sphere, the lighthouse, and the maritime attributes in the corner below right (globe, grade stick).19 These are however only allegorical elements and not enough to characterize the picture as such an allegory.20 Moreover there are also allusions to Trade, which in the Netherlands is very near to Navigation.According to Denning, Desenfans purchased the painting from Moses Vanhausen in 1783, but this is unconfirmed. Its first certain appearance is in the 1813 inventory of Sir Francis Bourgeois’ collection. Many paintings by Lingelbach of harbour scenes are mentioned in 18th- and 19th-century sale records, but none can be certainly linked to DPG326.21...

... e Trinità de’ Monti.Thomas Kren suggested that the picture dated from the 1640s, when Lingelbach was in Rome.26 But while after his return to Amsterdam Lingelbach eventually gave up painting small Italian scenes in favour of fanciful and exotic port scenes (see DPG326), he continued to make use of the architecture he had seen in Rome: the Trinità de’ Monti, for example, appears in a port scene painted in 1665 but on the left side of the picture (see under DPG326, Related works, no. 2b). It also appears in a scene of handing out food to the poor, which includes a colossal Roman statue (Related works, no. 2) [9].It is not certain, however, that DPG55 is by Lingelbach.27 An identical painting said to have traces of a signature was on the Paris art market in 1980 (Related works, no. 1); it is not clear which is the original, if either of them is. DPG55 is listed as a Lingelbach in Britton’s 1813 inventory of Bourgeois’ collection; Cockburn attributed it to Pieter Cornelisz. van Slingelandt (1640–91) in 1817, in the earliest Dulwich catalogue, a suggestion rejected by Denning in 1858 and 1859. Sparkes in 1876 attributed the picture to Lingelbach again, and he was followed by all subsequent authors....

Peter LELY

... ish painter, draughtsman and collector...

... t art collections in 17th-century England, including Van Dyck’s Cupid and Psyche (1639–40; Royal Collection) [3], bought at the sale of Charles I (1600–1649), the ‘Lely Venus’, a Roman 2nd century AD crouching Venus (BM, London) [4], and some 10,000 prints and drawings. He was knighted in January 1680; he died at his easel less than a year later.LITERATUREGraham 1695, pp. 343–4; Buckeridge 1706, pp. 444–7; Buckeridge 1754, pp. 402–4; Houbraken 1753, pp. 456–73; Baker 1912; Beckett 1951; Waterhouse 1953, pp. 62–7; Millar 1978; Talley 1981; MacLeod 2001; MacLeod & Alexander 2001; Curd 2010; Campbell 2012a; Joachimides 2015; Ecartico, no. 4546: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/4546 (Sept. 1, 2020); RKDartists&, no. 49235: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/49235 (Sept. 1, 2020)....

... enior indicates that both boys had access to Lely’s studio, where Charles junior may have seen these paintings, or indeed they could have been hanging in the Beale home, as the parents were known to have commissioned work from Lely in order to observe his technique. It is unlikely, however, that the two pictures form pendants: the more cursory Bartholomew picture lacks the subtle delicacy of the Shepherd Boy, pointing towards a later date in Lely’s career.In his ‘Visits to Country Seats’ Horace Walpole recorded Boy as a Shepherd in the collection of Edward Lovibond (1723–75) at Hampton c. 1770, as well as ‘several [other] pictures that were Mrs Beale’s’.11 It was presumably while in the Lovibond collection that Boy as a Shepherd was placed in a magnificent English Rococo frame of c. 1745. The portrait of Bartholomew Beale and one of an unidentified female sitter (c. 1663; Related works, no. 4)12 have very similar frames [7],13 which would suggest that all three paintings were together in the Lovibond collection, where they received comparable frames. There is no evidence that they were united before the Lovibond collection, or whether they were identified as portraits of Beale family members.The three paintings were separated in Lovibond’s posthumous sale in May 1776; Boy as a Shepherd travelled to Strawberry Hill with Walpole, and the two other portraits passed on to unknown location(s). The next known owner of what is now DPG662 is the pre-Raphaelite painter and collector Charles Fairfax Murray (1849–1919), who sold it, and presumably the portrait of the female sitter, to Charles Butler (1822–1910) by 1885. Fairfax did later own Boy as a Shepherd before bequeathing it to Dulwich Picture Gallery, but that was not until c. 1908, more than twenty years after he had sold the other portrait to Butler....

Gerrit Willemsz. HORST

... 26–36).1 He may have been an assistant in the workshop of Rembrandt (1606/7–69), but there is very little evidence of that in th...

... Isaac blessing Jacob...

... istinctly, lower right: Rembrandt./ 1653...

... etia, mid-1640s, canvas, 174.0 x 219.71 cm. Detroit Institute of Arts, 89.44.327a) Turkish bow: bow case, quiver and arrows, 16th century. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, W 1218, W 1217, W 1220.337b) Mughal or Persian quiver: leather quiver, India or Iran, 18th–19th century, with silver band around bottom in hammered floral pattern; two belt loops and two leather straps for suspension from a belt or saddle, l 55.8 cm, w 15 cm. Museum of Anthropology, Columbia, Mo., Grayson Collection, MAC 1994-0643A.34Copy8) George Scharf, in his sketchbook in the National Portrait Gallery, London, 57 NPG7/3/4/2/68, p. 21, annotated to the right of the image ‘Dulwich Gallery / GS Nov. 8th 1859’, ‘Canvas, Large, lifesize’ and ‘No 272’ [8].35The painting appears in Desenfans’ first sale in 1785 and seems to have been in his collection continuously until his death in 1807. It was not in his ‘Polish’ sale in 1802. It was attributed to Rembrandt until 1842 (probably based on the false ‘Rembrandt’ signature, which is still visible). In 1842 Mrs Jameson suggested Jan Victors (1619–76/7), probably based on a false Victors signature that was removed in 1952–3. Richter and Sparkes agreed with the attribution to that artist. Horst’s signature reappeared with the removal of the ‘Jan Victors’ signature.36 It is considered to be Horst’s best painting.37The subject comes from the Book of Genesis 27:22–3, in which Jacob, at the instigation of his mother Rebecca, impersonates his older brother Esau to obtain the prophetic blessing of his blind father Isaac. This blessing guaranteed to Jacob not only a superior rank in the family, a double portion of the paternal inheritance, and priestly office, but the inheritance of Abraham, where the recipient’s children would be God’s chosen people. Rebecca had overheard her husband sending Esau out to hunt, as he wished to eat before blessing him. She instructed Jacob to kill two goats and prepared a meal for Isaac. She gave Jacob a garment of Esau’s, and as Esau was ‘a hairy man’, she wrapped the kids’ skins around Jacob’s hands and neck. Jacob then brought the meal to his father.Rebecca can be seen at the right on the far side of the bed to which her ailing husband is confined. Isaac raises one hand in blessing, while the other feels the kids’ skins on Jacob’s hands. To complete the impersonation of Esau the hunter, Horst has added a quiver of arrows on Jacob’s back, an unusual but not unique touch. This quiver, however, caused Bruyn to re-identify the composition as Isaac blessing Esau (Genesis 27:42): the figure with the quiver could not be Jacob, because he was not a hunter. Against his argument, as he said himself, is the appearance of Rebecca, not mentioned in the Bible at that point, but he considered this part of an iconographical convention.38 There are, however, two details that can prove which brother is shown. Jacob’s hands were covered with kids’ skins to deceive his father’s touch, and the food prepared for Isaac was made from the kids. In our opinion both are visible, so this is Jacob.Isaac blessing Jacob was a very popular theme with Rembrandt’s pupils (Related works, nos 3a) [3]; Gerbrand van den Eeckhout (1621–74)), and 3c.I, II (Victors)), although Rembrandt did not paint the subject himself:39 the nearest he came to the image was a depiction of Saskia in bed (Related works, no. 4e; see also 4d). It has been suggested that in Rembrandt’s workshop the theme was a subject for competition.40 It seems that the first to have depicted the subject is Govert Flinck, in the years 1633–4, before he entered the Rembrandt-Uylenburgh studio (Related works, 3b.I, II) [5]. That picture seems to have been based on a composition of Jan Lievens (1607–74) of c. 1626, known only from a print by Jan Gillisz. van Vliet (1600/1610–68; Related works, no. 3b.Ia) [4].41 There are many large paintings with variations on the image of a bearded old man in bed, with the kneeling Jacob and Rebecca in front of or behind the bed, in an interior that is often richly decorated with Eastern curtains, carpets, furniture and armour. The same ingredients – the man in bed, the old lady, the young man, in a richly decorated Eastern interior – feature for instance in David’s Dying Charge to Solomon by Ferdinand Bol and in David presenting the Sceptre to Solomon by Cornelis de Vos (1584–1651) (Related works, nos 4a–4f) [6].Horst treated the subject on at least two other occasions, most notably in a picture formerly in Berlin that again showed Jacob with a quiver of arrows (Related works, no. 1a) [1].42 The features of Jacob in the Dulwich painting reappear on one of Joseph’s brothers in Jacob shown the Bloody Cloak of Joseph (Related works, no. 2b) [2].43Horst gave his history painting an Old-Testament look by using a heavily decorated quiver, very much like ones with a Persian provenance (cf. Related works, no. 7b). The eye-catching Anatolian carpet had the same function.44 We know that Rembrandt had a collection of exotic objects that could be used to give an air of authenticity to this kind of Old Testament subject (he often used his fantasy as well).45 Gerard Dou (1613–75) in one of his pictures used the same round shield as Rembrandt, in whose collection it probably featured.46Although this painting is not of the highest quality – Bruyn called Horst a ‘well-meaning but anaemic Rembrandt follower’,47 and Sluijter, perhaps more accurately, saw him as ‘a mediocre follower of the early Flinck and Bol’48 – it is very intriguing, both for its iconography and for its style in comparison to the many other depictions of the subject by painters working in the orbit of Rembrandt.A 19th-century painting by Walter Charles Horsley (1855–1934) also at Dulwich, Old Time Tuition at Dulwich College (DPG607; Related works, no. 5) [7], could very well have been inspired by Horst’s Biblical scene.49 Of course there are differences and the composition is in reverse, but Dulwich and this ‘Rembrandt’ would have been an association easy to make, and DPG214 a composition waiting for a 19th-century answer....

Gerard HOET I

... ERATURESluijter 1980; Wansink 1996; Löffler 1998, pp. 315–16; Mai, Paarlberg & Weber 2006, pp. 146–53, 338; Aono 2011, CD-rom, pp. 163–4; Saur, lxxiv, 2012, pp. 40–41 (R. Treydel); Ecartico, no. 3748: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/3748 (Hoet I; May 21, 2017); Ecartico, no. 11887: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/11887 (Hoet II; May 21, 2017); RKDartists&, no. 38840: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/38840 (Hoet I; May 21, 2017) and 38841: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/38841 (Hoet II; May 21, 2017)....

... of the trees on the left where the artist has painted over foliage with sky paint. The original tacking edges are present and fully visible on the front surface, as the stretcher is larger than the original picture. There is some raised craquelure centre left, which is now secure. There is abrasion and slight blanching of the paint. Damage to the top left corner has blanched retouching. Some greens in the landscape have discoloured and become brown. This painting is more discoloured than its pair. Previous recorded treatment: mid-20th century, ?cleaned and retouched by Dr Hell; 2006, secured raised paint, S. Plender; 2015, relined, cleaned and restored, S. Plender....

... is arms with reeds, new rising on the place.In both cases the theme is rejected love, including a wild pursuit, and in the end both are exempla of the victory of Chastity.The two pictures are late examples of the Dutch Italianate landscape tradition. Mai suggested that they were painted around the time of Hoet’s great decorative programme for Slangenburg Castle (Related works, no.1) [2] and consequently dated them ‘before 1700 (?)’.10The landscapes are completely idealized constructs, consisting of several layers of rising terrain to give the feeling of depth. While they underline the Arcadian and Classical nature of the scenes – a theme emphasized by the Roman tomb seen to the right in Pan and Syrinx – the trees dividing the composition of Apollo and Daphne into two are a nod to the compositions of Jan Both (1615/22–52) and the late pictures of Aelbert Cuyp (1620–91; e.g. DPG124, A Road near a River). The dominant influence however is that of the French Classical painters, most notably Claude Lorrain (1604/5–82), Nicolas Poussin (1594–1665), and Gaspard Dughet (1615–75).Because they were long identified as being by Gerard de Lairesse, the pictures were in Robert Browning’s mind when in 1877 he composed his verses on Lairesse in his Parleyings with Certain People of Importance in their Day:11… the pageantryWhich passed and passed before his busy brainAnd, captured on his canvas, showed our skyTraversed by flying shapes …… shapesOf god and goddess in their gay escapesFrom the severe serene; or haply pacedThe antique ways, god-counselled, nymph-embraced. …...

Jan van der HEYDEN

... –91, part 1: ‘Vanderhyde – A view in Holland’ and ‘Vanderhyde – A ditto view in Holland’). Shortly afterwards he decided to sell the pair, and they appear in his undated list of ‘Pictures to be Sold’ (early 1790s) and in the 1794 and 1795 sales of his collection.1 Moreover there was in the Drawing Room in Charlotte Street a landscape with ruins (‘Vanderhyde – A Ditto landscape figures and ruins’).2 Van der Heyden was a popular and well known artist around 1800 in London; he was also included in the overview of Dutch and Flemish artists by John Smith (vol. v, of 1834).LITERATUREVan der Heyden 1690; Wagner 1971; Schwartz 1983; De Vries 1984; Sutton 1987b; De Vries 1996; Sutton 2006; Pijl 2012a; Ecartico: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/3709 (June 6, 2017); RKDartists&, no. 38227: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/38227 (June 6, 2017)....

... s a view of an imaginary city, probably based on sketches made in different places, or the product of the artist’s imagination. Wagner has suggested that the left one of the churches resembles Santa Francesca Romana in Rome, between the Forum and the Colosseum. A very similar building appears in the background of a drawing by Adriaen van de Velde, but there it is embellished with a cupola (Related works, no. 1) [2]. As Van der Heyden is not documented as having visited Rome, he must have taken his ideas from prints or via drawings by other artists such as Adriaen van de Velde (who also never saw Rome). The church tower on the right is a combination of Netherlandish Renaissance elements (Related works, no. 2) and an architectural capriccio (Related works, no. 3). The Gothic church on the far right is Northern European, and Van der Heyden had probably seen it himself. The figures painted by Adriaen van de Velde enjoying themselves around the pool seem to be wearing Dutch costumes of a type fashionable in the third quarter of the 17th century. The seated peasant woman with a basket on the left also appears in a famous painting by Adriaen van de Velde, The Barn (Related works, no. 4d) [4].14 The drawings that have survived show how the artist prepared his compositions and re-used his figure studies (Related works, nos 4a–4c) [3] as he did again in DPG155....

Anthony van Dyck DPG173

... 26 x 99.6 cm...

... and Filippo Emanuele (1586–1605) di Savoia as Young Children, c. 1593–4, canvas, 171 x 142.2 cm. Fundación Yannick y Ben Jakober, Mallorca, 662.2472c) Jan Kraeck?, Vittorio Amedeo, Tommaso (1596–1656), Filippo Emanuele, Maurizio (1593–1657) and Emanuele Filiberto as Children, c. 1602–3. Private collection, Turin.2482d) Spanish painter at the court of Philip III or IV, Full-length Portrait of Emanuele Filiberto alone in Armour with Maltese Cross, c. 1606, canvas, 204 x 110 cm. Castello di Racconigi, 5526.2492e) Attributed to Tommaso Carlone, Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, marble, 96 x 66.5 x 37.5 cm. Galleria Sabauda, Turin, 20/720.2502f) Portrait of Emanuele Filiberto, present wherebouts unknown (inventory of the Marqués de Leganés, Madrid, 1642).2512g) Portrait of Emanuele Filiberto, present wherebouts unknown (inventory of the collection of his brother, Tommaso di Carignano, Turin, 1658).2522h) Portrait of Emanuele Filiberto, present whereabouts unknown (purchased for His Majesty Prince Victor Amadeus I of Savoye-Carignano from Garibaldi from Genoa, Turin, 20 Dec. 1736).253Other portraits3a) Lucas Vorsterman I after Peter Paul Rubens after Titian, Charles V in Armour (Imp. Caes. Carolus V. Avg.), proof impression, inscriptions, engraving, 425 x 320 mm. BM, London, 1862,0712.50 [2].2543b) Anthony van Dyck, The Lomellini Family, c. 1626, canvas, 265 x 248 cm. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh, 120.2553c) Anthony van Dyck, Filippo Spinola, canvas, 137 x 121.5 cm. Cincinnati Art Museum, Cincinnati, O., 1927.393.2563d) Anthony van Dyck, Count Hendrik van den Bergh, signed A VA. DYK F, c. 1627–9, canvas, 114 x 100 cm. Prado, Madrid, 1486.2573e) Anthony van Dyck, Portrait of a Man in Armour (a Gonzaga?), c. 1622–4, canvas, 115.5 x 104.5 cm. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, 490.2583f) Attributed to Anthony van Dyck, Giovanni Vincenzo Imperiale, 1626, canvas, 128.9 x 105.4 cm. NGA, Washington, Widener Collection, 1942.9.89.2593g) Versions of Peter Paul Rubens, Marchese Ambrogio Spinola3g.I) Panel, 117 x 85 cm. Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, Brunswick, GG 85.2603g.II) Panel, c. 1627, 116 x 84.5 cm. National Gallery, Prague, O 9688 [3].2613g.III) Canvas, 118 x 85 cm. St Louis Art Museum, St Louis, Mo., 33.34 (formerly Duke of Leuchtenberg).2623h) Michiel van Mierevelt, Ambrogio Spinola, signed and dated Pitore Michiel Mierevelde. 1609, canvas, 119 x 87.5 cm. RM, Amsterdam, SK-A-3953 [4].263Armour with Savoy decoration4a) Maestro del Castello, armour of Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, etched and gilt steel. Patrimonio Nacional, Real Armería, Madrid, A.360-368 [5].2644b) Maestro del Castello, gorget, pauldrons, breastplate, arm harnesses. Private collection.2654c) Orazio Calino of Brescia?, burgonet, gorget, pauldrons, breastplate, tassets, arm harnesses, gauntlets, early 17th century. Present whereabouts unknown (Christie’s, 20 June 1979, lot 9).4d) Unknown maker, three-quarter armour (helmet, gorget, breastplate, backplate, tassets, culet, pauldrons, gauntlets), very low carbon steel, gold, gold braid, velvet and leather, gilt, blued, etched and incised, c. 1620–35. Wallace Collection, London, no. A63.266Lace5) Anthony van Dyck, Portrait of a Genoese Woman with her Son, 1623, canvas, 242.9 x 138.5 cm. NGA, Washington, Widener Collection, 1942.9.91.267Lent to the RA to be copied in 1846, 1875, and 1876....

... the public, which was in turn the key to maintaining power.277 This magnificent portrait presented Emanuele Filiberto to his prospective bride and her family as wealthy and therefore powerful. Secondly, as we shall see, the conventions used in the portrait emphasized his exalted lineage.Van Dyck’s portrait of Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy is, with Velázquez’s Philip IV (DPG249), the second of two depictions of the grandchildren of Philip II of Spain in Dulwich. Both utilize conventions devised at the Habsburg courts in the 16th century for the presentation of royal majesty. Van Dyck’s portrait has a long lineage. Portraits in armour of both the dukes of Burgundy and the Habsburg emperors – from whom Emanuele Filiberto was descended – first appeared in the mid-15th century. The remarkable inheritance of Charles V – progressively Duke of Burgundy, King of Spain, and Holy Roman Emperor – led to Titian reinventing these conventions in the 1530s and 1540s.278 Titian’s portrait of Charles V is lost and is only known from the print by Vorsterman, which was made after the copy by Rubens (Related works, no. 3a) [2]. Van Dyck’s changes, compared to Titian’s composition, concern the helmet and the lace ruff. Titian placed the helmet in the background at the same height as the head of the sitter. Van Dyck also places the helmet on a table in the background, but lower down and with lavish feathers that give the scene a festive character. The same type of helmet with feathers on a table features in Mierevelt’s portrait of Ambrogio Spinola of 1609 (Related works, no. 3h) [4] and in other Titian portraits. Mierevelt’s sitter also wears a lace ruff. Van Dyck might have seen this portrait, which was painted in The Hague, or the print after it by Jan Harmensz. Muller. In Rubens’s portrait of Spinola some twenty years later we see the same feathers and ruff but different armour (Related works, no. 3g.I–III) [3]. The other men depicted by Van Dyck in armour (Related works, nos 3b–3e) seem much more martial than DPG173, perhaps because they have much less showy collars of linen or lace. In general DPG173 is painted much more precisely and smoothly than Van Dyck’s other portraits of the period. His virtuosity went into depicting the decorated metal, lace and skin, almost like a Leiden fijnschilder (fine painter). There is not such precision in Van Dyck’s other formal portraits of this period and later.279DPG173 was lent to the Royal Academy three times to be copied by pupils. The American portrait painter Chester Harding was very much impressed by it in the early 19th century.280...

Adriaen HANNEMAN

... painters and sculptors left the guild in 1656 and set up their own association, Confrerie Pictura, he accompanied them and became its first dean (1656–9), and dean again (1663–6). At his death in 1671 his estate was small; what became of his wealth is unclear.Hanneman was vitally important for the dissemination of Van Dyck’s style of portraiture in the Northern Netherlands, and one of the most brilliant Dutch painters in a style that was very popular in the international circles of The Hague.LITERATURETer Kuile 1976; Ekkart 1996a; Ekkart 1998a; Saur, lxix, 2011, pp. 129–30 (R. E. O. Ekkart); Ecartico, no. 3496: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/3496 (May 13, 2017); RKDartists&, no. 35816: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/35816 (May 13, 2017)....

... eting 10 May 1915), p. 59 (no. 572); Baker 1915, pp. 104–5, fig. [2] (wrongly dated 1654 in text); Cook 1926, pp. 272–3, no. 572; Toynbee 1950, p. 80; Cat. 1953, pp. 22, 62, no. 572; Ter Kuile 1976, pp. 85–6, no....

... 09, which he considers a Hanneman); De Jongh 1975–6, pp. 89–91, fig. 20; Ter Kuile 1976, p. 126 (rejects attribution to Hanneman); Murray 1980a, p. 304 (after Hanneman); Beresford 1998, ...

Cornelis DUSART

... ised 25 April 1660–Haarlem, 1 October 1704, buried 6 OctoberDutch painter, draughtsman, printmaker and ...

... than two hundred books, remarkable in itself, but also remarkable for the fact that a list survives, showing that he possessed not only the books on art and art literature that a 17th-century Dutch artist might well have, but also many theological works.LITERATURETrautscholdt 1966; Sutton 1984a, pp. 196–7, no. 41; Schnackenburg 1996b; Beaujean 2002; Van Thiel-Stroman 2006e; Anderson 2010; Aono 2011, CD-rom, pp. 160–61; Ecartico, no. 2667: http://www.vondel.humanities.uva.nl/ecartico/persons/2668 (25 Dec. 2017); RKDartists&, no. 25070: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/25070 (25 Dec. 2017)....

... istinctly on the side of the kennel, lower right: C. Dusart, 1682...

... ate, suggested that the picture was a late work when the influence of Adriaen van Ostade had waned, but in fact it was painted only two years after Dusart had been admitted to the Guild of St Luke, when he was twenty-two years old. The quiet scene and the use of the dark foreground and the arch as framing devices are particularly reminiscent of some aspects of the œuvre of Cornelis Bega (Related works, no. 3a) [6]. Murray suggested the influence of Rembrandt.14 Indeed there is a picture of a Rest on the Flight into Egypt formerly attributed to Rembrandt (Related works, no. 1a) [2] which bears a general resemblance to Rembrandt’s print of a Holy Family (Related works, no. 1b) [3], and which could have been seen by Dusart. Otherwise, Rembrandt’s example could have reached Dusart via the work of his master. Ostade depicted a scene like this in a painting in Budapest and in an etching, both of 1647 (Related works, nos. 2a, 2b) [4-5]. However Dusart changed the quiet interiors of Rembrandt and Ostade and the noisy inn interiors of Bega (Related works, nos. 3b, 3c) to a quiet scene outdoors, in a courtyard, which indeed looks a bit like a Rest on the Flight into Egypt (also because of the donkey), as Nowak suggested....