Rapid #: -18670472

CROSS REF ID: 16667059810004146

LENDER: UUM :: Marriott Library

BORROWER: IL4J6 :: Main Library

TYPE: Book Chapter

BOOK TITLE: Ferdinand Bol (1616-1680): Rembrandt's Pupil

USER BOOK TITLE: Ferdinand Bol (1616-1680): Rembrandt's Pupil

CHAPTER TITLE:

BOOK AUTHOR: Albert Blankert

EDITION:

VOLUME:

PUBLISHER: Doornspijk Davaco

YEAR: 1982

PAGES: 130-134

ISBN: 9789070288051

LCCN:

OCLC #:

Processed by RapidX: 2/17/2022 12:50:41 PM

The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other
reproductions of copyrighted materials. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to
furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to
be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research". If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a
photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use", that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This
institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve
violation of copyright law.
 February 17, 2022 Call #: Level 2 ND653.B57 B5413
1982
.....J
.....J Borrower: RAPID:IL4J6

-------
Location/Notes:
~ Lending String:
!!!!!!!!!!
~
.c Journal/Book Title: Ferdinand Bol (1616-1680) Billing Category: Exempt
.....J = Maxcost:

----
- Volume:
+'"

-
+'"
0 Issue: Delivery Method: Send via Odyssey
'i:: MonthlYear: 1982
L-
CO Pages: 130-134 email:
~

-- EMAIL:
!!!!!!!!!!

s: Article Author: Albert Blankert

CO !!!!!!!!!!
+'"
:::> Article Title:
l+- eo
0 eo
M
>.
+'"
Shipping Address:
en ~ ILL Number: -18670472 NEW: Main Library
L- ~
(1)
> z
.... 11111111111111111111111111I1111111111111111111111111111
C "C
:::> C'IS
::J
-
..J

NonCE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS

The copyright law of the United States [Title 17, United States Code] governs the making of photocopies or the other reproductions
of copyrighted material.

Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One
of these specified conditions is that the reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or
research. If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of fair use, that use may
be liable for copyright infringement.

This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve
violation of copyright law. No further reproduction and distribution of this copy is permitted by transmission or any other means.
Ferdinand Bol
(1616-1680)
Rembrandt's Pupil

ALBERT BLANKERT

DAVACO
This publication was made possible through a grant of the Netherlands Organization for the
advancement of Pure Research (ZWO), The Hague, The Netherlands

© 1982 Davaco Publishers

All rights reserved

DAVACO PUBLISHERS
BEUKENLAAN 3
8085 RK DOORNSPIJK
THE NETHERLANDS

Translation from the Dutch by Ina Rike, Amsterdam

(pp. 159-192 were written in English by the author)

Lay-out by Nora Kohler

Printed by Dijkstra Niemeyer BV, Groningen
ISBN 907028805 2

No part of the contents of this book may be reproduced without the written permission
from the publisher.
130

95 SAME COMPOSITION Plate 103

Fully signed and dated r.
Can., 70 x 60 em. See pp. 64,65.
PROV.: ColI. Arthur Maier (Kletzl).- Sale Miethke Gallerie, Vienna, 1938 (Witt).- Coll. Count Wallis(sales cat.
1939).- Sale Arthur Maier (Karlsbad), Cologne (Lempertz), 30 Nov. 1939 .no. 3 (with ill.).- Present whereabouts
unknown.
LIT.: O. Kletzl, 'Bilder der Sammlung Arthur Maier-Karlsbad', in: Belvedere, 11,1932, p. 169, ill. 23.
The sales catalogue gives the date 1650 which should undoubtedly be 1659, as in the other versions. Judging
from the illustration, the painting is either more softly modelled, or more worn than the other versions.

95a SAME COMPOSITION Plate 104

Can., 70 x 59 em.
Sale Pollack, Frankfurt, 2 Dec. 1919, no. 25 with ill.
Judging from the illustration, this piece must be a copy.

MEN: TURNED TO THE RIGHT, IN INTERIOR

96 THE TOPER Plate 105

LONDON, WALLACE COLLECTION,cat.1928,no 74
Signed bottom r., f Bol, type BID.
Can., 89 x 83 em. c. 1651. See pp. 58,64.
PROV,: Sale Paul Perier, Paris, 16 March 1843, no. 5, 00. 3650.- (subj., descr., meas.).- Coll. Lord Hertford,
before February 1859.
Listed in the old inventory as a work by J. Victors (cat. 1928). The composition (in reverse) strongly resembles
that of BoI's etching B 14 of 1651. On the medallion the Archangel Michael impaling the dragon.

97 PORTRAIT OF A YOUNG MAN Plate 106

BERLIN (W.), JAGDSCHLOSS GRUNEWALD, inv. no. GK 1664, cat. 1964, no. 25
Signed and dated upper right above the arm: f Bol fec./164 .., type A (facsimile in cat. 1964).
Can., 94.2 x 75.5 em. 1645. See p. 56.
PROV.: since 1860 at the latest in one of the Berlin palaces (cat. 1964).
Formerly considered as a work by Rembrandt (or his school), not recognized as a Bol until 1932 (cat. 1964).
H. Borsch-Supan (in cat. 1964) points to the resemblance to Rembrandt's portrait of Nicolaas van Bambeeck at
Brussels of 1641 (BR.218).

98 PORTRAIT OF A YOUNG MAN Plate 107

FRANKFORT A.M., STAEDELSCHES KUNSTINSTITUT, inv. no. 918, cat. 1966, p. 19
Signed and dated 1.of shoulder: f bol fecit/1644, type A.
Can., 96.3 x 79 em. See pp. 56, 57,58,66.
PROV.: Sale Cardinal Fesch, Rome, 17 March 1845, no. 21 (subj., descr., meas., sign., dat.) purchased there for
the museum (cat. 1966).
LIT.: Wurzbach, p. 128.- Isarlov.- Rosenberg-Slive, p. 92, ill. 67 A.
The sales catalogue of 1845 describes the signature, which is currently quite legible, as 'd moitie effacee': 'sans
doute, afin qu'on put attribuer l'ouvrage d la premiere maniere terminee de Rembrandt'. ('half erased': 'no doubt
so that the work could be attributed to the first refined manner of Rembrandt').

99 PORTRAIT OF AN ELDERLY MAN Plate 108

SCHWERIN,STAATLICHES MUSEUM,inv. no. 50, cat. 1882, no. 91, cat. 1962, no. 49
Vaguely signed and dated under the 1. hand: 1647 (facsimile in cat. 1882).
Can., 88.2 x 76.5 em.
PR0 V.: possibly identical with a portrait of a man by Bol mentioned in 1792 as being in the collection; cat. 99 as
 131

'unknown master' in cat. Schwerin 1821 and cat. 1836 (cat. 1882 p. X and p. XV, no. 91).
LIT.: Wurzbach, p. 128.- Sumowski, 1957-61, p. 256, ill. 4.- Sumowski, 1965, pp. 122-3, at no. 13.
Sumowski pointed out that a drawing in the Lubomirski museum at Lemberg, which Benesch attributed to Rem-
brandt (Benesch, II, no. 438, ill. 489), is certainly a study by Bol for cat. 99. pl. 203C

100 YOUNG MAN AT A WINDOW Plate 109

COLL. ROBARTS, LONDON, 1928, still present 1977
Can., 143.5 x 99 em. See pp. 59,65.
LIT.: G.F. Waagen, Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain , Supplement, London, 1857, p. 164.-Mellaart,
p. 154, pI. II D.-Dobrzycka, p. 427, ill. 8.- Van Hall, no. 27.
According to an item in the Times (June 1928) the John Robarts ColI. had been formed about a century earlier
by Robarts' ancestor Abraham Robarts, a friend of the connoisseur and art-dealer John Smith. In 1857 Waagen
described the piece as in the Abraham Robarts ColI. Ever since Mellaart's essay it has, groundlessly, been con-
sidered a self-portrait. Painted shortly after 1650.

101 PORTRAIT OF A MATHEMATICIAN Plate 110

PARIS, MUSEE DU LOUVRE, cat. 1922, no. 2330, Inv. no. 1063
Marked and dated bottom r.: f Bo11658, type D.
Can., 77 x 63 em. See pp. 65,66
PROV.: Coll. Catherine de Cosse-Brissac, widow of Noailles, 1793-94 (cat. 1922).
LIT.: Wurzbach, p. 128; III, p. 32.- M. Furcy-Raynaud, 'Les tableaux et objets d'art saisis chez les emigres et
condamnes et envoyes au Musee Central', in: Archives de I 'art francais, Paris, 1912, vol. VI, p. 307.- Isarlov.-
D.J.E. Schrek, 'Portretten van Wiskundigen', in: Euclides, 1955, pp. 103-105.
'The geometrical figure represents the diagram which relates the stereometric functions and the lines in the circle
(cord, radius, tangent) ... The stereometric functions came into use in the first half of the seventeenth century'
(letter from P. van der Star of the Rijksmuseum voor de Geschiedenis der Natuurwetenschappen in Leiden). A
similar figure occurs in the title page of: Fr. van Schooten, Professor Matheseos tot Leyden, Tabulae sinum,
tangentium, secantium ad radium 10.000.000 met 't gebruyck der selve ... , Amsterdam, 1627 (reference by Drs.
P. Schuurman, Amsterdam).
Schrek lists collections and series of portraits of mathematicians. He considers cat. 101 as unique among Dutch
representations of 'a' or 'the' mathematician.

lOla COPY
PRIVATE COLLECTION, LUXEMBURG, 1968
61 x49 em.
Photograph at RKD. The figure is surrounded by less space than in cat. 101.

102 PORTRAIT OF A MAN Plate 111

BRUNSWICK, HERZOG ANTON ULRICH-MUSEUM, cat. 1969, no. 245
Signed and dated bottom I.: (BJ) fecit 1658.
Can., 129 x 106 em. See p. 65.
PROV.: from 1776 onwards in the collection (cat. 1966).
LIT.: Wurzbach, p.128, III, p. 32.- Van Dijke, ill. 27.

I was unable to distinguish the letters 'B1' of the signature which were reputed to be legible.

103 SELF-PORTRAIT Plate 112

AMSTERDAM, RIJKSMUSEUM, cat. 1934, no. 539
Can., 128 x 104 em. See pp. 50,63.
PROV.: Sale Amsterdam, 17 Aug. 1818, no. 9. Hfl. 18.25 to: Brondgeest ('self-portrait of Bol', 124.5 x 93.5 em,
see below).- Coll, Art Dealer A. Brondgeest, in 1849 bequeathed to the museum (cat. 1934;see below).
 132

LIT.: Scheltema, p. 87.- Wurzbach, p. 128.- Hofstede de Groot, 1922, p. 8.- Bredius, 1923, p. 82, pl. I B.-
Hofstede de Groot, 1923, p. 27.- L. Goldscheider, Funfhundert Selbstportrdts, Vienna, 1936, p. 38.-Bernt, I,
no. 99, with ill.-Bruyn-Emmens, pp. 3-9, ill. 1.- Dobrzycka, p. 427,ill. 9.- VanHall, no. 24.-Hoffmann, pp.
27-58.
Already in 1859 Scheltema described the painting as a self-portrait of BoI. So did all catalogues of the Rijks-
museum, which added that when the picture was in the collection of Brondgeest (who bequeathed it to the
Rijksmuseum in 1849) it was presumed to be a portrait of the art-dealer's ancestor which had long been in the
Brondgeest family. But Hofstede de Groot pointed out long ago, firstly, that there is no mention of this in Brond-
geest's will, and secondly that the painting is most probably the 'self-portrait of Bol' of virtually the same size,
which Brondgeest bought at the sale of 1818 (Hofstede de Groot, 1922, 1923). Yet Hofstede de Groot was not
completely sure that it was indeed a self-portrait because the sculpture in the lower right could, in his view, be an
indication that it is a portrait of a sculptor (some time later Goldscheider suggested, on the basis of the presumed
pl. 119 resemblance with the man in cat. 110, that the model might be the sculptor Artus Quellinus). Meanwhile Bredius
pointed out the striking similarity with the man in the extreme left in Pieter van Anraedt's group portrait, dated
fig. 13, 14 1675, of the Governors of the Oudezijdshuiszittenhuis, a board of which Bol was a member in that year (Bredius,
1923, pl. I B).
Hofstede de Groot countered that it was by no means certain which figure in Van Anraedt's group portrait
represents Bol (J. Six had previously pointed out the second man from the left as a self-portrait by Bol himself in
Van Anraedt's painting: J. Six, 'Opmerkingen omtrent eenige meesterwerken in 's-Rijksmuseum', in: Oud-Holland,
11,1893,p.lOl).
However, since then a document of 1779 from the archives of the Oudezijdshuiszittenhuis has revealed that
the figure on the extreme left of Van Anraedt's painting is indeed Bol (see: Oldewelt, p. 17). In view of the afore-
mentioned resemblance between this man and the one in cat. 103 I believe that cat. 103 is in fact a self-portrait.
It seems most likely that it is 'The portrait of Mr. Bol in a guilt frame' which was in his son's Elbert's estate in
1709-1710 (see Documents).
Bruyn and Emmens draw attention to the richly carved frame and to the large sunflower which figures so
prominently among the other plant decorations on it. These authors cite numerous examples to demonstrate that
in the seventeenth century the sunflower was a symbol of faithful love in various senses: the sunflower turns to the
sun as the lover turns to the beloved, the faithful tum to their Lord and the good subject turns to his sovereign.
Their interpretation in this particular case - in the context of a self-portrait - that the sunflower symbolizes the
art of painting is, to my mind, made all the more convincing by their reference to a passage from Vondel's 'Inwij-
dinge der Schilderkunste op Sint Lucas Feest' of 1654:

Like the sunflower her eyes 'Gelyk de zonneblom haar oogen

Lovingly turns to the arch of the sky Uit minne dreait naer 's hemels bogen
And follows with her face En volght met haer gezicht
The life-givinglight Het alverquickend licht
The sun, which gives verve to everything De zon, die 't al zijn verwe geeft,
And which giveslife to tree and plant En daer geboomte en plant by leeft;
Zoo volght de Schilderkunst,
So the art of painting follows
Uit aengebore gunst,
Out of innate privilege
Ontsteecken van een heilig vuur
Burning with a holy fire
De Schoonheit van Natuur ..'
The beauty of nature ...'

The sunflower may, at the same time, be an allusion to Bol's name, as is assumed in the Rijksmuseum catalogue;
the objections to this explanation expressed by Emmens and Bruyn are countered by Hoffmann (Hoffmann, with
supplementary material, on the iconography of the sunflower; see also: I. Bergstrom, Dutch Still-life Painting in
the Seventeenth Century, New York, 1956, p. 207; R. Freeman,English Emblem Books, London, 1967, p. 251,
pl. 41 index s.v. 'Sunflower'). Sunflowers also occur in cat. 174-1 and (without clearly symbolic significance) in cat. 14.
Furthermore, Emmens and Bruyn assume that the sleeping Cupid may allude to Bol's status of widower: the
painting would in that case have been painted after the death of his first wife and before his second marriage in
 133

1669;in this way these authors arrive at a date of c.. 1665-1670.

A drawn copy by C. Hamburger, 1842, is kept in the Rijksprentenkabinet in Amsterdam, ColI. Gerritsen (Van
Hall).
Addendum: Meanwhile E. de Jongh convincingly demonstrated that the picture may very well have been painted
at the occasion of Bol's marriage with Anna van Erckel in 1669. The sleeping cupid and the column are traditional
symbols of chastity, a quality which at that time was considered highly important for a person, (re) marrying at
an advanced age. The sunflower would allude to Bol's non-easuallove for his new spouse (E. de Jongh, 'Bol vincit
amorem', forthcoming).

104 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 113

PRIV ATE COLLECTION, ANTWERP
Signed c.r.
Can., 83 x 73 em, c. 1665. See p. 66.
PROV.: ColI. Comte de Kilmorey, Kilkeel.- ColI. J. Albertson, Edinburgh.- Scottish National Portrait Gallery,
Edinburgh, 1883 (according to sales cat. 1926).- Sale M.W. Cornwallis et al., Brussels (Fievez), 19 Dec. 1924, no.
12, with ill.- Sale Brussels (Giroux), 15 March 1926, no. 5, with ill.- Sale Brussels (Palais des Beaux-Arts), 19
Febr. 1957, no. 363, with ill.- Sale Antwerp (Van Herck), 3 June 1980, no. 7, with colour ill. on cover.

105 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 114

COLL. LORD MOSTYN, MOSTYN HALL
Signed 1. above chair: Bo1.
Can., 76 x 63 em. Seep.65.
EXH.: Dutch Pictures, Royal Academy, London, 1952/53, cat. no. 262.

105-1 A GENTLEMAN SITTING AT A TABLE Plate 106A

LENINGRAD, HERMITAGE
Can., 129,5 x 100 ern.
PROV.: ColI. Crozat.
LIT.: cat. of the museum 1895,no.848; 1958, no. 764.~Bemt,ed.1969-70,I,fig.135.
'Signed' in the right background 'Rembrandt f.' with a date 1657. The latter may be original. Acquired as Rem-
brandt, yet in the Hermitage's catalogue of 1838 already correctly as a Bol. The picture is traditionally considered
as the companion piece to a Portrait of a Lady, also in the Hermitage, which, in my view however, cannot be by
Bol (see cat. R 206). fig. 125

MEN: TURNED TO THE RIGHT, OUTDOOR SETTING

106 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 115

PARIS, LOUVRE, cat. 1922, no. 2331, inv. no. 1064
Signed and dated r. on balustrade: f Bol/1659, type C.
Can., 118 x 99 em.
PROV.: Musee Napoleon, Conquetes de 1806 (cat. 1922).
LIT.: Wurzbach, p. 128.- Isarlov.- F. Boyer, 'Tableaux laisses au Musee royal par les Puissances Etrangeres ..',
in Bulletin de /a societe d'histoire de I 'artfrancais, 1969, Paris, 1971, p. 82.

107 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 116

PUY-EN-VELA Y, MUSEE CROZATlER, inv. no. MNR 493
Signed and dated bottom 1.: 1Bo1/1662, type C.
Can., 120 x 97 cm.
PROV.: ColI. Mniszeck (according to cat. 1913).- ColI. Kraemer, 1911 (sent in exh.1911).- Cf. Eugene Kraemer,
 134

Paris (petit), 2 June 1913, no. 48, with ill.- Recuperation Francaise no. MNR 493; brought from the Louvre,
Paris to Puy, 1967.
LIT.: Isarlov.
EXH.: Grands et petits Maitres Hollandais..., Jeu de Paume, Paris, 1911, cat. no. 7.

108 HENDRICK TRIP Plate 117

PONCE (PUERTO RICO), ART MUSEUM LOUIS A. FERRE FOUNDATION, cat. 1965, no. 58.0057
Can., 108.5 x 91.5 em. c.1660. See p. 62.
PROV.: Sale Pierce Joyce et al., London (Sotheby), 16 July 1958, no. 90, to: Art Dealer D. Cevat, London (oral
communication Mr. Cevat).
LIT.: Dudok van Heel, 1979, p. 19, fig. 3.

pl. 99 Cat. Ponce compares the piece with my cat. 91 of 1659. In my opinion the man in cat. 108 is identical with the
pl. 172 model in cat. 161 of 1660, i.e. Hendrick Trip. Dudok van Heel thinks that cat. no. 108 is the cut-off pendant of
pl. 184 cat. no. 172 and that both paintings may have formed a series with Rembrandt's portraits of Jacob Trip and
fig. 15 Margaretha de Geer (London, National Gallery).

109 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 118

Can., 108.5 x 87 em. c. 1658. See p. 62.
PROV.: Art Dealer Knoedler, New York, no. 10884 (RKD).- Bought in London (Sotheby), 1905, sold Dec. 1909
to Charles A. Walker, Boston (oral communication H. Ripperger of Art Dealer Knoedler).- Present whereabouts
unknown.

pl. 156 The arrangement of the figure is a repetition of cat. 145; the hands in both pictures are virtually identical.

110 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN (SO-CALLED' ARTUS QUELLINUS ') Plate 119

AMSTERDAM, RIJKSMUSEUM, cat. 1934, no. 545
Signed and dated bottom 1., f BoI/1663, type C (facsimile in cat. 1934).
Can., 124 x 100 em. See pp. 33, 62, 63.
PROV.: Sale J.C. Pruyssenaar, Amsterdam, 27 Febr. 1804, noA, Hfl. 101.- (descr., meas.).- Sale Wamar Wrees-
man, Amsterdam, 11 April 1816, no. 20 (subj., meas.), Hfl. 139.- to: De Vries.- Sale Huis met de Hoofden, 16
July 1819, no. 23 (subj., descr., sign., dat.), Hfl. 129.- to: De Vries.- Acquired by the museum in 1821, as a
portrait of Jacob van Campen (cat. 1934).
LIT.: Scheltema, p. 86.- Wurzbach, p. 128.- Isarlov »-L. Goldscheider, Fiinfhundert Selbstportrdts, Vienna,
1936, p. 38.- Bernt, no. 99; 2nd edition, no. 134.- E. Neurdenberg,De Zeventiende eeuwsche Beeldhouwkunst
in de Noordelifke Nederlanden, Amsterdam, 1948, p. 173, ill. 138.- H. Gerson, 'Jan Victors', in: Kunsthistorische
Mededelingen van het Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorische Documentatie, 3,1948,2, pp. 19-21, ill. 5.- C.H. de
Jonghe, 'Portretten van Artus Quellinus', in: Huldeboek Pater Dr. B. Kruitwagen, The Hague, 1959, p. 211, ill. 5.
- Van Hall, pp. 32, 56, nos. 201.24 and 347.1.- H. Kuhn, 'Untersuchungen zu den MalgrOnden Rembrandts',
in: Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Wurttemberg, 1965, p. 205.
The sales cat. of 1804 makes no mention of the identity of the model. At the sales of 1816 and 1819 the portrait
was listed as the 'Renowned Architect Jacob van Campen'.
In 1821 the museum bought the painting as a portrait of Van Campen (cat. 1934). Subsequently it was again
treated as a 'portrait of an unknown man' until, in 1859, the man was re-christened Artus Quellinus (Scheltema).
However, Lady de Jonghe demonstrated that this identification, too, is incorrect (De Jonghe).
KUhn studied the ingredients of the paint-layer of cat. 110.

111 PORTRAIT OF A GENTLEMAN Plate 120

LOS ANGELES, COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART, inv. no. 55.33
Can., 119 x 95 em. See p. 62.
PROV.: Sale Amsterdam, 7 April 1794, no. 30, to: Royens, Hfl. 10.10 (descr., meas.).- Donated to the museum
by Howard Young, 1955.