Part 18

It is not known for certain whether Jan Steen (1626?-1679) was a pupil of Nicholaes Knupfer, a native of Leipzig who resided for a time at Leyden, but he certainly worked under Adriaen van Ostade at Haarlem, and later became a pupil of Jan van Goyen, whose daughter Margaretha he married as his first wife. Steen certainly leased a brewery in Delft for six years, and he is frequently mentioned in the archives of that town about 1656; he subsequently kept a tavern in the Langebrug in Leyden in 1672. His art is vivacious if not boisterous, and the strength and versatility he displayed in the nine hundred pictures with which he is justly credited give him a high place among the artists of Holland in the seventeenth century. The frequency with which he painted the _Interior of a Tavern_ (No. 2578) has suggested that he carried on the tradition of the Flemish-Dutch roysterer Adriaen Brouwer; but such scenes, magnificently as they are handled, are apt to become boring in time. This large canvas is dated 1674, and the coat of arms of Charles V. is fastened on to the balcony in which are spectators. The _Merry Company at Table_ (No. 2579) is somewhat sketchy in parts, but the lighting is well regulated, and the canvas is signed in full on the back of a blue-covered chair to the right. That the _Bad Company_ (No. 2580, Plate XXXIV.) is admirably painted will be conceded by all, but refinement is not its distinguishing feature. A young man dressed in a red jacket is sleeping with his head on the lap of a girl, while another girl is relieving him of his watch. The scene is laid in a tavern, on the floor of which are painted with wonderful precision a number of tiny objects. It was not Steen’s habit to paint representations of cultured society such as Terborch delighted in.

PIETER DE HOOCH

The Louvre contains only two paintings by Pieter de Hooch, who was born in 1629 at Rotterdam, a town which played a relatively unimportant part in Dutch painting. He also lived at Delft and Leyden. The _Interior of a Dutch House, with a Woman preparing Vegetables_ (No. 2414), is a good example, and is fully signed in the bottom left-hand corner. The _Dutch Interior, with a Lady playing Cards_ (No. 2415, Plate XXXV.), is full of incidents, contains six figures, and is signed on the base of one of the columns supporting the mantelpiece in the left foreground. No museum in the world exhibits the art of Pieter de Hooch in such excellence as does the National Gallery, which contains three masterpieces from his hands that have indirectly been the cause of assessing the whole of the artist’s life-work on too generous a basis. It is indisputable that during the last ten years of his life, of which nothing is known later than the signature and date, 1677, on the _Music Party_ in the collection of Baron H. A. Steengracht at The Hague, his art deteriorated very considerably both in colouring and draughtsmanship. He may well have been a pupil of Karel Fabritius (1624-1654), but it is almost incredible that he can have been a pupil of the Italianiser Nicholaes Berchem, as Houbraken ventured to assert. This museum contains nothing by Ochtervelt, many of whose pictures have from time to time been accepted as the work of Pieter de Hooch.

From the shortlived artist Karel Fabritius derives the almost incomparable master Jan Vermeer van Delft (1642-1675), whose fifty authentic pictures are to-day among those most coveted by collectors. As a _painter_ skilled in the technicalities of his profession Vermeer must be accorded the highest rank. The subtle and mysterious handling of his _Lace Maker_ (No. 2456, Plate XXXVI.), with its cool colour scheme and dominant tones of blue and lemon-yellow, make it difficult for us to realise that until twenty years ago his works were neglected. Indeed, this small canvas was acquired in 1870 at the Vis Blokhuyzen sale for the ridiculous sum of £290. Jan Vermeer (or Van der Meer) van Delft is not to be confused with Jan Van der Meer of Haarlem (1628-1691), who is included in the official catalogue as the painter of the _Outside of an Inn_ (No. 2455, marked No. 2022 on the frame). It is fully signed, and bears the date 1652.

NICOLAS MAES

One of the last lingering influences of Rembrandt is seen in the art of Nicolas Maes (1632-1693). The genre pictures of his early period are so vastly superior to his later portraits that it was formerly assumed that there might well have been two artists of the same name. He certainly delighted in painting several versions, which vary considerably in size, of _Grace before Meat_ (No. 2454). In his pictures we see the mind that broods, and women who meditate rather than act. The best examples of his domestic scenes are finely graduated, although the sadness of advancing age becomes monotonous in time.

GABRIEL METSU

A high place among the painters of “Conversation-pieces” must be accorded to Gabriel Metsu (1630?-1667), a shortlived artist who was born at Leyden and learnt the first principles of his art from Dou. As early as 1644 he seems to have earned some reputation as a painter, his signature appearing on his _Court Physician_ in that year. He came under the influence of Rembrandt, and in later life practised as a painter at Amsterdam, where he died.

Metsu, whose work is at first sight not easily distinguishable from Terborch’s, acquired a facility in the control of the expression and the ever-varying gesture of the hands in his pictures, that was denied to many of his contemporaries. Instances of this are the figure of the Christ writing a long Latin inscription on the ground in the _Woman taken in Adultery_ (No. 2457), the ease with which the young lady in a white satin dress runs her fingers over the keys of the spinet in the _Music Lesson_ (No. 2460), and the treatment of the _Dutch Lady_ (No. 2462), who holds a jug in her right hand. The last-named panel is evidently the companion to the very thinly painted _Dutch Cook peeling Apples_ (No. 2463), which is signed “G. METSU.” Perhaps his best outdoor scene of humble life is the _Vegetable Market at Amsterdam_ (No. 2458), although his handling of the trees suggests that his forte was the Conversation-piece of Dutch tradition, and that he would not have risen to high rank as a landscape painter. The placing of the signature on a letter, which in this instance lies on the ground, is a favourite device with Metsu. He has derived much pleasure from the treatment of the textures of the tablecloth, the curtain, and the chair in the _Officer visiting a Lady_ (No. 2459). The _Alchemist_ (No. 2461) may be the companion picture to the _Sportsman_ in the Gallery at The Hague. Much speculative criticism has been indulged in by critics as to whether the so-called _Portrait of Admiral Cornelis Tromp_ (No. 2464) represents that admiral, and some doubt has also been cast on its attribution to Metsu.

LANDSCAPE PAINTERS

The naturalistic treatment of the landscape background in the religious pictures of Jan van Eyck and his successors, Memlinc, Bouts, Hugo van der Goes, and other painters in the Netherlands, in time brought about the promotion of landscape painting to an independent art. Among the earlier Dutch artists who approached the study of Nature were Arent Arentzen (1586?-1635?), as we see from his _Landscape with a Fisherman_ (No. 2300A), and Roeland Roghman, who was born a year later than Jan van Goyen, and lived as late as 1685. He painted the _Landscape_ (No. 2555B), which was formerly in the Paul Mantz collection. Indeed, several Dutchmen of the period sought to commit to panel views of nature, as in the case of Pieter de Bloot (1600-1652), who gives us a _Landscape with a River_ (No. 2327B).

The romantic feeling which so often pervades the background of Rembrandt’s paintings, and is so apparent in such etchings as the _Three Trees_, can only be touched on here. This new tendency is best exemplified in the works of Jan van Goyen (1596-1656), who may be regarded as the founder of a self-centred school of landscape painting in Holland; but it was his ever handy sketch-book that enabled him to outstrip his rivals in this branch of Dutch art. He is seen to great advantage in his very fine _Banks of a Dutch River_ (No. 2375), his superb _River View with eight Men in a Boat_ (No. 2378), a signed and dated work of 1649, a large light-brown-toned _River in Holland_ (No. 2377), a good _Banks of a Canal_ (No. 2379), as well as a _Dutch Canal_ (No. 2376) and a _Dutch River_ (No. 2377).

Aert van der Neer (1603-1677) painted with strong contrasts of light, as in his _Banks of a Dutch Canal_ (No. 2483); and his monogram is to be found on the seat at the foot of a tree in his _Dutch Village_ (No. 2484), where his propensity for painting moonlight scenes is well illustrated. Herman Saftleven’s (1609-1685) _Banks of the Rhine_ (No. 2563); Jan Asselyn’s _View of the Lamentano Bridge on the Teverone_ (No. 2301), _Landscape_ (No. 2302), and _Ruins in the Roman Campagna_ (No. 2303); and the two _Landscapes_ (Nos. 2332 and 2333) by Jan Both (1610-1652), who worked in Rome and painted Italian landscapes under the influence of the French artist Claude Lorrain, show the gradual introduction of foreign influences. Joris van der Hagen (died 1669) takes a new line in the representation of a very low horizon in his _Environs de Haarlem_ (No. 2382); but his _Landscape with Peasants crossing a Ford_ (No. 2381) is dull in tone and composed of unrelated parts.

The _Banks of a River_ (No. 2561D) is a superb example of the art of Salomon van Ruysdael (1600?-1670), one of the founders of the Haarlem school of landscape, and the uncle of Jacob van Ruisdael. The _Large Tower_ (No. 2561C) gives a better idea of his power than the _Ford_ (No. 2561B). Another painter in the same school, Cornelis Decker (1618?-1678), has a _Landscape_ (No. 2346). Although Isack van Ostade at times gave himself up to trivial subjects, as we have already seen, the merit of his frozen river scenes (Nos. 2510, 2511, 2515) is firmly established, and the happy way in which he combined a genuine appreciation of nature with great skill in the placing and treatment of his figures has earned for him a high place among the Dutch landscape painters.

AELBERT CUYP

Unlike most of the artists of his time in Holland, Aelbert Cuyp (1620-1691) was highly esteemed by his contemporaries, his social position and his good fortune in money matters freeing him from the poverty which Hobbema and others endured. He painted portraits with much skill, as we see from his _Portrait of a Man_ (No. 2345A) and his _Portrait of a Boy and a Girl with a Goat_ (No. 2344); but he is best known as a cattle painter, his sturdy cattle being artistically grouped in thick green pastures flooded with sunshine, as in his _Herdsman with Cattle_ (No. 2341). He attained much success also with his riding pictures, and the _Starting for the Ride_ (No. 2342) and the _Riding Party_ (No. 2343) are in every way preferable to his _Boats on a Rough Sea_ (No. 2345). Following his usual habit, he has placed no date on any of these six pictures. He had no pupil in the proper sense of the term; but a host of imitators, such as Jacob van Stry and the much later English Royal Academician Sidney Cooper, failed ignominiously in their feeble attempts to copy his methods.

Jan Wynants was another landscape painter in the Haarlem School, although he settled in Amsterdam and died there in 1682. His _Outskirts of a Forest_ (No. 2636) is signed and dated 1668, and is superior to the _Landscape_ (No. 2637) which bears his own signature as well as that of Adriaen van de Velde, who on numerous occasions inserted the figures for him. Wynants has also placed his name on a small _Landscape with Sportsman and Falconer_ (No. 2638).

Adriaen van de Velde has been careful to sign and date each of the seven pictures by which he is represented (Nos. 2593-2599). By Allart van Everdingen (1621-1675), who travelled in Norway and painted rocky scenes and waterfalls, we find two _Landscapes_ (Nos. 2365 and 2366).

JACOB VAN RUISDAEL

The greatest of all Dutch landscape painters, with the possible exception of Jan van Goyen, is Jacob van Ruisdael (1628?-1682), who occupied himself more especially with rushing waterfalls and undulating country. His _Storm on the Coast_ (No. 2558) is a fine achievement, but his best picture in this collection is the _Landscape_ (no No.), which was bequeathed by Baron Arthur de Rothschild. His _Woody Landscape_ (No. 2559), the _Road_ (No. 2559A), _Landscape_ (No. 2561), and the _Entrance to a Wood_ (No. 2561A), cannot, however, compare with his _Sunny Landscape_ (No. 2560), which bears the artist’s monogram.

HOBBEMA

The talents of Meindert Hobbema (1638-1709) were so disregarded by his countrymen that in disgust he, at the age of thirty, took a humble post in the Customs. His woody scenes seen in the pale sunlight of the early afternoon are not copied from any chance scenery, but composed; and his _Water Mill_ (No. 2404), fine though it is, contains passages that will be met with elsewhere. The _Farm_ (No. 2404A) is a very good picture, as also is the _Landscape_ (No. 2403) from the Nieuwenhuys collection. A very large number of painters, including Wyntrack, who gives us a _Farm_ (No. 2639), painted the figures into the foregrounds of Hobbema’s best works.

PHILIPS WOUWERMAN

In a large number of Philips Wouwerman’s pictures the landscapes are of secondary importance to the figures; and although the execution is careful and conscientious, the frequenter of picture galleries is apt to tire of his make-believe genre-pieces, landscapes with horses, riders, sportsmen, soldiers, robbers, gipsies, and the like. The Louvre presents an imposing array of fifteen of the twelve hundred or more pictures by Philips Wouwerman (1619-1668), and his brother and pupil Pieter is credited with a poor but historically interesting _View of the Porte de Nesles, Paris_, in 1664 (No. 2635).

It will be convenient here to group Adam Pynacker (1622-1673) with his three pictures, Willem Romeyn (1624?-1696?) with one, Abraham Begeyn (1637?-1697) with one, Guilliam de Heusch (1625?-1692) with one, Dirk van den Berghen (1645-1690?) with two, and Glauber (1646-1726) with a single _Landscape_ (No. 2374) in which the figures are inserted by Gerard de Lairesse. Mention must, however, be made of Paul Potter, the highly esteemed cattle painter, who died in 1654 at the early age of twenty-nine. One of his latest canvases is the _Cows and Sheep in a Field_ (No. 2527), of 1652; but his _Horse in a Field_ (No. 2528) of the following year, and the _Wood at The Hague_ (No. 2529), give an excellent idea of his art. These and the _Horses at the Door of a Cottage_ (No. 2526) show that Paul Potter had a sound knowledge of animal anatomy. He is seen at his best in small compositions such as are here exhibited, in which the construction and _mise-en-scène_ are simple and the details delicately rendered. It is a popular fallacy that his chief contribution to the fame of Dutch art was his large _Bull_ of 1647, which measures 8 ft. by 12 ft., in The Hague Gallery. He did not live long enough to form a “school.”

THE ITALIAN INFLUENCE

The Italianising influence was already beginning to make itself felt, to the lasting detriment of Dutch painting, and the typical example of this downward movement is Nicolaes Berchem (1620-1683), who was founded on his father, Pieter Claesz, and on Pieter de Grebber, and Jan Wils at Haarlem, while he also was impressed by Claes Moyaert and J. B. Weenix at Amsterdam, where he removed in 1677. There is scarcely a well-furnished gallery in Europe that does not seek to pride itself on possessing one of Berchem’s renderings of _Crossing the Ford_, or a _Woman upon an Ass in conversation with another Person_. The Louvre is no exception to this rule, and exhibits his _Cattle crossing a Ford_ (No. 2315) and nine other canvases and panels, nearly all of which bear his much-vaunted signature. His art is to-day deservedly out of fashion with discerning collectors.

Berchem’s pupil, Karel du Jardin (1622-1678), who is invariably at much pain to sign his pictures, is seen to some advantage in his very Italian and in every way characteristic _Italian Charlatans_ (No. 2427), the typical _Ford in Italy_ (No. 2428), and eight other works. His attempts to depict a _Calvary_ (No. 2426) have not been crowned with success, as the composition is overcrowded and undramatic; nor do we experience any emotion on regarding his _Portrait of Himself_ (No. 2434), a small production on copper.

Breenberg (1599-1659?), who was born at Deventer, the home of Terborch, has depicted a _View of the Campo Vaccino at Rome_ (No. 2334), and a _Ruins of the Palace of the Cæsars_ (No. 2335) in the Italian manner beloved by Berchem and Pieter van Laer. The latter, who is also named Bamboccio, is represented by two small oval panels. Lingelbach (1622-1674), who frequently collaborated with other Dutch artists, may be judged by his _Vegetable Market at Rome_ (No. 2447) and three other canvases, and Frédéric de Moucheron (1633?-1686) by a _Leaving for the Hunt_ (No. 2482). It will be convenient to mention here Reynier Nooms, whose _View of the Old Louvre from the Seine_ (No. 2491) has some historical interest.

ARCHITECTURAL PAINTERS

A limited number of painters busied themselves in making faithful transcripts of the streets and the exterior appearance of the buildings. Jan van der Heyden (1637-1712) was perhaps the most successful in this direction, and his _View of the Town Hall of Amsterdam_ in 1688 is an excellent example of his methods, while the Louvre also possesses three small panels by him. Jan Abrahamsz Beerstraten (1622-1666), the son of a cooper at Amsterdam, travelled to Italy and the Mediterranean, proof of which is afforded by his _Old Town Gate at Genoa_ (No. 2310). The typical architectural painter is, however, Gerrit Berckheyde (1638-1698). Although he never went to Italy, his _View of Trajan’s Column_ (No. 2324) is a welcome relief from the many versions he painted, with conspicuous success, of _The Market-Place of Haarlem_.

Hendrik van Steenwyck (1580-1648) almost invariably contented himself with reproducing the _Interiors of Churches_ (Nos. 2582, 2583); but his _Christ in the House of Martha and Mary_ (No. 2581) is an unusual subject with him, and must be his masterpiece. The _Vestibule of a Palace_ (No. 2490), by Isaac van Nickelle (fl. 1660), is very good of its kind; but the _Interior of a Guard-Room_ (No. 2453), by Aart van Maes, is a poor attempt at dramatic action.

MARINE PAINTERS

The fact that the Dutch had fought with swamp and water and possessed a large maritime commerce, is reflected in the _Seascapes_ of Simon de Vlieger (1600-1660), and in the art of Ludolf Backhuysen (1631-1708), who is represented by a _Stormy Sea_ (No. 2309) and five other canvases; but one of the best works of this class in the Louvre is the _Marine-piece_ (No. 2600) by Willem van de Velde the Younger (1633-1707), who crossed over to England, and after a long career died at Greenwich. These men sought to carry on the earlier tradition of Jan van Goyen and the two Ruisdaels, but they showed less originality and power.

STILL-LIFE PAINTERS

Much appreciation and some extravagant praise has been lavished on the still-life painters who, at the time when the higher aims of artistic endeavour began to die out in Holland, displayed remarkable ability. The cultivation of horticulture at Haarlem, the centre of the tulipomania fever in the middle of the seventeenth century, may have had an influence on the artistic presentation of inanimate nature; this feeling was no doubt stimulated by the display made by the goldsmiths in an age of great prosperity. Willem Claesz Heda, who was born 1594, is among the earliest of the Dutch still-life painters, and his picture (No. 2390) is dated 1637; he, however, did not die until more than forty years later. Jan Davidsz de Heem (1606-1684), the painter of _Fruit and a Vase on a Table_ (No. 2391) and of another and much larger picture (No. 2392), was the pupil of his father, David de Heem; as he spent many years at Antwerp, he is sometimes regarded as a Flemish painter. That Abraham van Beyeren (1620-1675?), who painted several sea-pieces, was specially fond of copying the appearance of fish, is seen from his _Still-life: Fish_ (No. 2326A), at the Louvre, which has in recent years also acquired another work (No. 2312A) by him. Willem Kalf (1621?-1693) may have studied under H. G. Pot, the Haarlem genre-painter. He was evidently impressed with the chiaroscuro of Rembrandt, and often placed the drinking-cups, wine-glasses, and fruit on a richly-coloured tablecloth. He is here represented by four examples, of which the _Dutch Interior_ (No. 2436) is the best. Eight pictures by Jan Huysum (1682-1749), two by Jan van Os (1744-1808), and one by C. van Spaendonck (1756-1839) belong to the latest phase of art in Holland, and mark the decadence in full operation. It will be noticed that the Louvre has a much larger selection of still-life pictures than the National Gallery, which seems to regard achievements of this kind with disdain.

Melchior Hondecoeter (1636-1695), the painter of the farmyard, gives unmistakable proof of his power in his large signed _Eagle swooping down on a Farmyard_ (No. 2405), and two rather smaller pictures (Nos. 2406-7).

Jan Weenix (1640-1719), who usually concerns himself with dead game and birds, is working on the usual lines in three (Nos. 2610, 2611, and 2612A) of his four pictures in the great French museum; the other represents _A Seaport_ (No. 2612). He was the fellow-pupil of Hondecoeter in the studio of his father, Jan Baptist Weenix (1621-1660), who studied for a time under the early Dutch master, Abraham Blomaert, and worked in Italy for four years. For that reason the latter has adopted an Italian mode of signing his only picture (No. 2609) in the Louvre.

THE DECLINE