Gerard Ter Borch

Gerard ter Borch
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.

With contributions by
Alison McNeil Kettering

Arie Wallert
Marjorie E. Wieseman
National Gallery of Art, Washington

American Federation of Arts, New York
ii Wheelock
Gerard ter Borch
iii t h e a r t i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t o f g e r a r d t e r b o r c h
The exhibition was organized by the Note to the Reader
American Federation of Arts, New York, Dimensions are cited with height preceding
width in centimeters followed by inches in
and the National Gallery of Art, Washington.
parentheses.
Exhibition dates
National Gallery of Art Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
7 November 2004 – 30 January 2005 Wheelock, Arthur K.
Gerard ter Borch / Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. ;
The Detroit Institute of Arts
with contributions by Alison McNeil Kettering,
27 February –22 May 2005
Arie Wallert, Marjorie E. Wieseman.
Gerard ter Borch is supported by an p. cm.

indemnity from the Federal Council
Catalog of an exhibition held at the National
on the Arts and the Humanities.
Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., and at the
Detroit Institute of Arts in 2004 – 2005.
Copyright © 2004 American Federation
Includes bibliographical references and index.
of Arts, New York, and Board of Trustees,
National Gallery of Art, Washington. ISBN 0-89468-317-9 (pbk. : alk. paper)
All rights reserved. This book may not be ISBN 0-300-10639-4 (hardcover : alk. paper)
reproduced, in whole or part (beyond that
1. Borch, Gerard ter, 1617 – 1681 — Exhibitions.
copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of
I. Borch, Gerard ter, 1617 – 1681. II. National
the U.S. Copyright Law, and except by review-
Gallery of Art (U.S.) III. Detroit Institute of
ers from the public press), without written
Arts. IV. Title.
permission from the publishers.
ND1329.B63A4 2004
759.9492 — dc22 2004008762
Produced by the Publishing Office,
National Gallery of Art
Hardcover edition published in 2004 by
www.nga.gov
the National Gallery of Art, Washington,
and the American Federation of Arts,
Editor in Chief, Judy Metro
New York, in association with Yale University
Editor, Julie Warnement
Press, New Haven and London
Designer, Chris Vogel, with production
assistance from Rio DeNaro and Mariah Shay
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Typeset in Warnock Pro and Quadraant Sans
Printed by Waanders Publishers, Zwolle,
The Netherlands
Contents vi Directors’ Foreword
viii Acknowledgments
xi Lenders to the Exhibition
1 The Artistic Development of Gerard ter Borch

19 Gerard ter Borch and the Modern Manner

31 The Miracle of Gerard ter Borch’s Satin

Arie Wallert
43 Catalogue
187 Letter from Gerard ter Borch the Elder

to His Son, 3 July 1635
192 Notes to the Essays
196 Notes to the Catalogue:

Provenance, Exhibition History, and References
214 Bibliography
221 Exhibitions
225 Index
Directors’ Foreword Gerard ter Borch (1617–1681) was one of the finest of all Dutch seventeenth-century
painters. Not only are his individual paintings beautiful and evocative, but his oeuvre is also
remarkably varied, including genre scenes, stable interiors, depictions of historical events, and
portraits, all of which surprise and delight. Born into a family of artists from Zwolle, in the
eastern portion of the Netherlands, Ter Borch received his earliest training from his father. He
also studied in Haarlem with Pieter Molijn (1595 – 1661), and later traveled extensively, not only
in the Netherlands, but also to England and Spain. He eventually returned to Zwolle and, about
1654, moved to nearby Deventer, where he continued to paint for the rest of his life.
Ter Borch is especially renowned for his refined interior scenes, which typically depict two
or three elegantly clad figures engaged in an activity such as letter writing or music making. No
other Dutch artist has ever captured so well the elegance and grace of wealthy burghers, or so
subtly expressed psychological interactions between figures. Neither has any conveyed as effec-
tively the shimmering surface of a long white satin skirt nor the undulating rhythms of a trans-
lucent lace cuff. He also painted remarkable small-scale, full-length portraits of burghers, whose
confident postures and solemn expressions reflect their dignity and affluence. Executed with
great sensitivity of touch, these portraits are distinctive for their psychological intensity. His
paintings capture human ideals and moods that resonated far beyond Zwolle and Deventer, not
only with Johannes Vermeer (1632 – 1675) in Delft and Frans van Mieris (1635 – 1681) in Leiden,
but also with art lovers and connoisseurs during Ter Borch’s lifetime and for centuries to come.
Consisting of over fifty of Ter Borch’s paintings from public and private collections, this
monographic exhibition of his work is the first ever to be presented in the United States. The
careful selection of paintings, including some of his finest masterpieces, surveys the breadth
of this remarkable artist’s achievement and provides an overview of his career.
The exhibition and the accompanying catalogue are the result of a close collaboration
between the National Gallery of Art and the American Federation of Arts (AFA). The idea for
Gerard ter Borch was first proposed by Thomas Padon, deputy director for exhibitions and
programs at the AFA, who brought it to the National Gallery and proposed a partnership —
a proposal that was welcomed and has become the basis for a new relationship between our
two institutions. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., curator of northern baroque painting at the National
Gallery, selected the works in the exhibition and wrote the lead catalogue essay on Ter Borch’s
artistic development. He has guided the project in conjunction with Kathryn Haw, curator
of exhibitions at the AFA. Their collaboration was abetted by numerous staff at the National
Gallery and the AFA as well as by the contributions of the three scholars who wrote so ably for
the catalogue: Alison McNeil Kettering, William R. Kenan Jr. Professor of Art History at
Carleton College, who wrote an essay about the ideas of the modern in Ter Borch’s work and
a number of the catalogue entries; Arie Wallert, curator at the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, who
wrote an essay about Ter Borch’s painting techniques; and Marjorie E. Wieseman, curator of
European painting and sculpture at the Cincinnati Art Museum, who wrote a number of the
catalogue entries.
After its viewing at the National Gallery of Art, the exhibition will travel to the Detroit
Institute of Arts. A small selection of paintings from the exhibition will subsequently be shown
at the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.
The exhibition is supported by an indemnity from the Federal Council on the Arts and
the Humanities. For providing financial support for the exhibition catalogue, we would like to
thank the Samuel H. Kress Foundation and Furthermore: a program of the J. M. Kaplan Fund.
Above all else, we are deeply indebted to our lenders, whose generosity, cooperation, and good-
will have made this exhibition a reality.
Julia Brown Earl A. Powell III

Director Director
American Federation of Arts National Gallery of Art
vii
Acknowledgments The exhibition Gerard ter Borch has been an enormously enriching experience,
not only because it has brought us closer to an understanding of the extraordinary accomplish-
ments of this remarkable artist, but also because of the wholehearted support of so many col-
leagues who have helped make the idea a reality.
Gerard ter Borch is, of course, one of the most engaging and wide-ranging Dutch artists of
the seventeenth century, one who is both well known and greatly beloved by art lovers. He was
a perceptive portraitist, whose dignified images convey the ideals and aspirations of the patrons
for whom he worked. His genre scenes, on the other hand, are a window on life’s other side,
those unguarded moments of caring and concern, of uncertainty, anticipation, and inner anxi-
ety. The portraits and the genre paintings are equally compelling, for both benefited from his
profound understanding of the complexities of human psychology, and from his ability to con-
vey the naturalism of surface and texture, including the sheen of satin. The prospect of bringing
together a large group of some of his finest works has been both exciting and daunting.
While we oversaw the planning of the exhibition at our respective institutions, the National
Gallery taking the curatorial lead and the AFA taking the organizational lead, the collaboration
between the AFA and the National Gallery has created opportunities for many on the staffs at
both institutions to work together to enhance the exhibition and ensure its success.
In New York, Thomas Padon provided keen guidance throughout the organization of the
exhibition. Kathleen Flynn offered invaluable counsel on our collaboration and the logistics of
the tour. Beverly Parsons, head registrar, and Eliza Frecon, registrar, made the complex arrange
ments to ensure the safe travel of the remarkable paintings in the exhibition, and took the lead
in preparing the complex application for federal indemnity. Nelly Benedek and Suzanne Elder
Burke produced an invaluable resource for educators with important contributions from intern
Samuel Lederer. Margaret Touborg and Laura Fino secured critical financial support. Heidi
Riegler and Morgan Grant helped ensure the wide reach of the exhibition with a comprehensive
press campaign. Michaelyn Mitchell oversaw the production of the handsome exhibition bro-
chure with the assistance of Anne Palermo. Amy Poll, curatorial assistant in the exhibitions
department, gathered transparencies, comparative illustrations, and permissions, managed
loan agreements and correspondence, and handled innumerable details related to this exhibi-
tion with unfailing grace and good humor.
In Washington, the extensive resources and personal expertise of the staff at the National
Gallery’s library, particularly Neal Turtell, Lamia Doumato, and Ted Dalziel, enormously aided
research on the artist and his times. In the conservation department, Carol Christensen skill-
fully conserved the Gallery’s Ter Borch painting The Suitor’s Visit and provided important
insight on aspects of the artist’s painting techniques. D. Dodge Thompson, Naomi Remes, and
Tamara Wilson in the department of exhibitions and Sally Freitag and Michelle Fondas in the
office of the registrar were the liaisons with the AFA in organizing the exhibition and coordi-
nating the transportation of the works of art. Mark Leithauser and his outstanding design
department developed the handsome installation of the exhibition.
The Gallery’s publishing office took the leading role with this exceptional catalogue, with
editor in chief Judy Metro supervising its production, while Julie Warnement, with great care
and patience, combined with a sense of humor, worked with the various authors to prepare and
edit the manuscripts. Sara Sanders-Buell and Ira Bartfield helped insure that the illustrations
were all in place for the catalogue deadlines. Finally, Chris Vogel created the catalogue’s espe-
cially elegant design and Amanda Mister Sparrow ably proofed the layouts.
In the department of northern baroque painting, numerous staff, volunteers, and interns
have been involved in this project over the past few years. Particular gratitude is owed to Anna
Tummers and Elizabeth Nogrady, who undertook much of the essential research that helped
give the catalogue its scholarly basis. Bibliographical references were carefully checked and
entered by Anneke Wertheim and Sohee Kim. Adriaan Waiboer not only made astute observa-
tions about the catalogue texts, but also wrote the exhibition brochure. Molli Kuenstner, staff
assistant, diligently handled the many administrative demands connected with this project.
Numerous other colleagues have advised and assisted us on this project, or have supported
our requests for loans of valuable and fragile works of art, among them Sylvain Bellenger, Pieter
Biesboer, Marten Bijl, Charles Boissevain, Christopher Brown, Malcolm Cormack, Anthony
Crichton-Stuart, Jean-Pierre Cuzin, Tacco Dibbets, Diethelm Doll, Frederik J. Duparc, Patricia
Favero, Jeroen Giltaij, Marguerite Glass, Jan Piet Filedt Kok, David Jaffé, Guido M. C. Jansen,
Lawrence Kanter, Jan Kelch, Minerva Keltanen, George Keyes, Paul Knolle, Alastair Laing,
Friso Lammertse, Milko den Leeuw, Mark Leonard, Walter Liedtke, Joop van Litsenburg,
Daniëlle H. A. C. Lokin, Katherine Crawford Luber, Vladimir Matveev, Otto Naumann, Larry
Nichols, Robert Noortman, Nadine Orenstein, Lynn Orr, Pieter van der Ploeg, Konrad Renger,
Joseph J. Rishel, Axel Ruger, Scott Schaefer, Eddy Schavemaker, Peter Sutton, Stanton Thomas,
Renate Trnek, Ronald Winokur, Anne Woollett, and Elizabeth Wyckoff.
The project has been greatly facilitated by the thorough and thoughtful studies of earlier
scholars, in particular Sturla Gudlaugsson, whose exemplary 1959 – 1960 monograph on the
artist has been an indispensable resource. With thoughtful and balanced commentaries and
ix
exhaustive cataloguing, Gudlaugsson’s scholarly contributions remain as fundamentally valid
today as they were almost half a century ago. Another important guide in helping conceive this
project’s parameters was the last monographic exhibition devoted to this master, which was
organized at the Mauritshuis in The Hague and at the Landesmuseum in Münster in 1974.
Finally, Alison Kettering’s thorough study of the Ter Borch Studio Estate at the Rijksprenten
kabinet in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, which she published in 1988, proved to be an invalu-
able research tool. Her assessment of this remarkable collection of drawings from the Ter Borch
family has provided many new insights into the nature of the artist’s training. As is evident
from her many thoughtful articles on the artist in recent years, she has continued to open our
eyes to the many dimensions of Ter Borch’s work. We would especially like to thank Alison, as
well as Marjorie E. Wieseman and Arie Wallert, for their thoughtful contributions to the
exhibition catalogue and for their advice on many aspects of Ter Borch and his work.
To all of those who have helped bring the exhibition to its successful conclusion, we extend
our deepest gratitude.
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. Kathryn L. Haw

Curator of Northern Curator of Exhibitions
Baroque Painting American Federation of Arts
National Gallery of Art
x
Lenders to the Exhibition Alte Pinakothek, Munich Musée du Louvre, Paris
Cincinnati Art Museum National Gallery of Art,

Washington
The Cleveland Museum of Art
The National Gallery, London
The Detroit Institute of Arts
Philadelphia Museum of Art
City of Deventer
Polesden Lacey
Pieter C.W.M. Dreesmann (The National Trust)
Richard and Marcia Ehrlich Private collections
Fine Arts Museums of San Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

Francisco
Rijksmuseum Twenthe, Enschede
Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem
Royal Cabinet of Paintings
Gemäldegalerie der Akademie Mauritshuis, The Hague
der Bildenden Künste, Vienna
Sinebrychoff Art Museum,
The J. Paul Getty Museum, Finnish National Gallery, Helsinki
Los Angeles
Staatliche Museen zu Berlin —
Collections of the Prince of and Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
in Liechtenstein, Vaduz Gemäldegalerie
Manchester City Galleries The State Hermitage Museum,

Saint Petersburg
The Metropolitan Museum of Art,
New York The Toledo Museum of Art
Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts,

Rotterdam Richmond
xii Wheelock
The Artistic Development
of Gerard ter Borch
1 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

The lives of most seventeenth-century
Dutch artists are only dimly understood despite factual
information provided by occasional guild and archival
records and by anecdotal accounts contained in the
commentaries of city historians and painter-theorists
such as Arnold Houbraken (1660 – 1719).1 Biographies,
pieced together from incomplete records of differing
reliability, are notoriously subjective and often greatly
influenced by the nature of the artist’s paintings. A
prime example is Jan Steen (1625/1626 – 1679), who was
often described as though he were one of the drunks
and lechers he depicted in his works.2
With Gerard ter Borch the Younger (1617 – 1681) we
encounter an artist for whom exists an extraordinary
amount of biographical information.3 We can follow
his career almost on a yearly basis, from 1625 in Zwolle
in the province of Overijssel, where he trained with fig. 1
his father Gerard ter Borch the Elder (1584 – 1662), to
1681 when he died at the age of sixty-four in nearby tant lacunae exist in our knowledge of Ter Borch’s
Deventer. We have not only documents from all phases training, movements, and contacts. His artistic genius,
of his life, but also an extensive commentary by Hou- which was slow to mature, revealed itself almost with-
braken and, most importantly, a large number of draw- out warning in the late 1640s and early 1650s. Nothing
ings and paintings.4 We can even study the sequence of in his early work prepares us for the sensitivity of his
his childhood drawings (thanks to the inscriptions and portraits or for his ability to render the complex inter-
dates placed on them by his father) and read the letter weaving of psychological relationships in his genre
in which the father sent artistic advice to his son when paintings. Nowhere do we encounter at the beginning
he was in London in 1635. These resources are further of his career that unparalleled ability to capture the
reinforced by the remarkable survival of drawings, texture and sheen of fine fabrics that ensured his last-
albums, and sketchbooks by other members of Ter ing renown. Although the stylistic elements that came
Borch’s family.5 This material provides important together in his work may never be fully explained, his
insights into the types of visual sources and intellectual paintings capture human ideals and moods that reso-
ideas that stimulated other family members, particu- nated far beyond Zwolle and Deventer, not only with
larly his father and his half sister Gesina, and hence Johannes Vermeer (1632 – 1675) in Delft and Frans van
ones that would have affected Ter Borch throughout Mieris (1635 – 1681) in Leiden, but also with art lovers
his career. and connoisseurs during Ter Borch’s lifetime and for
Nevertheless, even with this plethora of informa- centuries to come.
tion about the artist’s training and career, it is extremely Gerard ter Borch the Younger benefited as an artist
difficult to account for Ter Borch’s distinctive vision as in many ways from the guidance of his father, not only
a portraitist and painter of scenes of daily life. Impor- from his instruction but also from his worldly experi-
2 Wheelock
ences and personal contacts. Indeed, in many ways, Curiously, Gerard the Elder’s interest in depicting 1. Gerard ter Borch,
Jan Baghstoren, Rode
the character of the young Ter Borch’s training follows landscapes virtually vanished once he returned to
Toren, and Onze Lieve
closely the pattern established by his father. Zwolle, Zwolle and married Anna Bufkens (1587 – c. 1621), Vrouwe Kerk, with
where both father and son were born, was an important who had been born and raised in Antwerp. Rather, he Boats Docked along the
Rode Torenplein, Zwolle,
trading center, but this provincial city had never estab- devoted his artistic energies to figural scenes: drawing 1632, pen in brown ink,
lished a significant artistic tradition (fig. 1). Although (and occasionally painting) biblical and mythological Rijksprentenkabinet,
Amsterdam (land
Gerard the Elder initially may have been trained by a subjects, and merry companies similar to those being scape sketchbook,
local artist, he would have found in Zwolle no master produced in Haarlem by Esaias van de Velde (c. 1590 – fol. 25r)
with a skill level comparable to that of his own when, in 1630) and Willem Buytewech (1591/1592 – 1624). Such 2. Gerard ter Borch the
the mid-1620s, he undertook the artistic education of secular scenes, which focused on amorous interactions Elder, Young People
Frolicking in the Grass,
his son. Consequently, Gerard the Elder must have had between the sexes, not only became a frequent subject early 1620s, pen in
further training in another city, probably Haarlem or for paintings, but were also featured in emblem books brown ink, brush
in various colors,
Utrecht, judging from the style of his own drawings and and songbooks. With the deft hand and ingenious wit Historisch Museum,
the works in his collection.6 that would soon animate the art of his son Gerard, the Rotterdam, Atlas van
Stolk (fol. 2r)
His most important training, however, occurred in elder Ter Borch created five watercolors of such amo-
Italy, where he stayed for at least seven years (probably rous scenes for a Haarlem songbook in the early 1620s
more) before returning to Zwolle about 1612. For much (fig. 2). In addition to illustrating written texts, he also
of that visit he was in Rome, where he resided at the wrote poetry, an interest that became more fully real-
Palazzo Colonna. The Colonna family also supported
his trip to Naples, and would have supported a trip to
Spain in 1611 had he not missed the boat.7 The personal
connections Gerard the Elder had with this Catholic
family suggest that he arrived in Italy with good recom-
mendations and was able to establish a close rapport
with them. Ter Borch also seems to have visited Venice,
Nîmes, and Bordeaux before returning to Zwolle.
Gerard the Elder’s extant drawings from this
period of his life are primarily vedute, topographically
accurate renderings of Roman ruins. Executed mainly
in a single sketchbook, these drawings resemble, in
their linear style and use of repoussoir effects, the draw-
ings of two important Antwerp landscape artists who
lived in Rome, Paul Bril (1553/1554 – 1626) and Willem
van Nieulandt II (1584 – 1635). As was characteristic with
northern artists working in Rome in the early seven-
teenth century, Ter Borch must have worked closely
with Dutch, Flemish, and Italian artists, perhaps travel-
ing with them to favorite sites where they could draw
naar het leven (from life).8
fig. 2

3. Gerard ter Borch, ized in the illustrated texts created by his daughter sister, Gesina (1631 – 1690). Two boys from this union
Man on Horseback,
Gesina in the various albums that have been preserved would also have artistic aspirations, Harmen (1638 –
Seen from Rear, 1625,
pen in brown ink, in the Ter Borch family archives at the Rijksmuseum c. 1677) and Moses (1645 – 1667) (cat. 46).
Rijksprentenkabinet, (see fig. 9). Because of the remarkable number of drawings
Amsterdam
If Gerard ter Borch the Elder had aspirations to that have been preserved in the Ter Borch family
4. G
erard ter Borch, Man become a professional artist, they never materialized, archives — in particular, drawings by Gerard the Elder,
Adjusting the Saddle of
a Horse, 1631, pen and probably because he realized that he would not be able Gerard the Younger, Gesina, Harmen, and Moses — we
brush in brown ink, to support his growing family on the income he earned are able to glimpse the teaching process that must have
over traces of black
chalk, Rijksprenten from his drawings and paintings. By 1628, as indicated unfolded under the father’s guidance. During Gerard
kabinet, Amsterdam on a document recording his third marriage, he had the Younger’s earliest years he was encouraged to study
prudently opted for the steady income of an adminis- prints made by a number of masters, including Hendrik
trative post in Zwolle. As License master, a position Goltzius (1558 – 1617) and Aegidius Sadeler (1555 – 1609).
previously held by his father, Harmen (1550 – 1634), he From them, he learned how to control his pen strokes
collected taxes on commercial traffic passing through and to apply ink with a brush to create chiaroscuro
the city for the States General in The Hague. It was an effects.9 He then progressed to drawing after sculpture,
important and time-consuming job: much of the trade particularly casts made after the antique — an exercise
in goods passing between Germany and Holland went that taught him to model the human form with light
through Zwolle, a fortified city situated at the juncture and dark.10 By the early 1630s he was making copies
of the rivers IJssel and Vecht, not far from the Zuider
Zee and the Dutch-German border. Even though these
new obligations precluded him from pursuing an artis-
tic career, he continued to foster hope that one of his
offspring would be able to follow the path he had aban-
doned. He quickly recognized that his eldest son had
innate artistic talent, which he encouraged with singu-
lar devotion. By 1625, when Gerard the Younger was
merely eight years old, the father was proudly annotat-
ing, dating, and saving his drawings for posterity (fig. 3).
The attention the father paid to his son’s training
may have been intended to provide him with a con
tinuity otherwise missing in his young life: Anna, his
mother, had died in 1621. Family continuity, unfortu-
nately, did not resume with Gerard the Elder’s second
marriage, which occurred later that year. Although his
union with Geesken van Voerst was blessed with two
daughters, Anna (1622 – 1679) and Sara (1624 – 1680),
Geesken also died young. In September 1628 Gerard
the Younger acquired a second stepmother, Wiesken
Matthys (b. 1607), and in November 1631, another half
fig. 3
4 Wheelock
after prints by Pieter Quast (1605 – 1647) and Jacques does not include many of the artist’s initial efforts.
Callot (1592 – 1635), whose character studies taught him Gerard the Younger continued to employ such replicat-
how to exaggerate certain human features and use body ing techniques throughout his career, using them to
language for dramatic effect.11 transfer both individual motifs and entire compositions
At the same time that he was creating these disci- from one support to another (see Wallert essay and
plined studies, Gerard the Younger was encouraged to cats. 39, 40).
make rapid renderings suggesting the movements and By 1631, when he was only about fourteen years old,
actions of figures and horses in his immediate environs. Gerard the Younger began a sketchbook of landscape
However, the fact that Ter Borch executed a number of drawings in which he depicted buildings in Zwolle and
these “quick” pen and ink studies over faint traces of farmsteads in the surrounding countryside (see fig. 1;
chalk suggests that they were not as spontaneous as cat. 25, fig. 1). These remarkably precocious pen and ink
they first appear (fig. 4). Judging from the large number drawings, which demonstrate great compositional sen-
of counterproofs and drawings with blackened versos sitivity, understanding of perspective, and ability to
in the Ter Borch family estate, Gerard the Elder appar- capture effects of light and shade, are in many ways
ently encouraged his offspring to develop methods for stylistically related to the vedute his father had made in
copying and revising their drawings.12 It thus seems Italy during the first decade of the seventeenth century.
probable that the estate “collection” of Gerard the In other respects, however, they are entirely different.
Younger’s early drawings was selectively edited and Not only are they more loosely handled, they depict
local buildings and settings, subjects that his father
never attempted to record.
Gerard the Younger’s instinctive interest in looking
at nature and human figures, both at rest and in action,
and in recording their rhythms, their energy, and their
spatial relationships was in accord with the changing
dynamics of Dutch art during the 1620s and 1630s.
These were areas, however, where Gerard the Elder had
never ventured during his artistic career. Hence, in the
early 1630s he let loose the reins and sent his son to
Amsterdam and then Haarlem to study with masters
who could provide guidance in these new artistic
approaches.
Just how Gerard the Elder chose a new master for
his son is not known. Nevertheless, because of his own
artistic experiences he had a circle of friends who could
advise him about appropriate learning environments
for a fifteen-year-old boy. In 1632, the younger Gerard
seems to have stayed briefly in Amsterdam. It has been
speculated that he went there to study with an artist
such as Pieter Codde (1599 – 1678) or Willem Duyster
fig. 4

5. Gerard ter Borch, (1598/1599 – 1635). Both painted not only portraits but of ruins such as the Huis te Kleef.14 Molijn’s influence is
Market at Evening in
also scenes of soldiers in their barracks or resting in also evident in the young artist’s drawings of nocturnal
Zwolle, 1635 – 1640,
pen and brush in inns, subjects that Gerard the Younger would gravitate scenes, among them, an evening market scene in Zwolle
black ink, over black toward in the early years of his career.13 where darkly silhouetted figures mill around lantern-lit
chalk, heightened
with white body color, More is known about his experiences in 1634 in tents (fig. 5). Ter Borch’s successful apprenticeship with
Rijksprentenkabinet, Haarlem, where he studied with Pieter Molijn (1595 – Molijn culminated in 1635, when he was named a mas-
Amsterdam
1661), a highly regarded painter and draftsman who ter in Haarlem’s Saint Luke’s Guild.15
6. Gerard ter Borch, was active in the administration of the Haarlem Saint With this important milestone behind him, Gerard
Robert van Voerst, 1635 –
1636, black chalk, Luke’s Guild. Molijn, who fully embraced the stylistic the Younger left almost immediately for London, where
Rijksprentenkabinet, innovations of his Haarlem colleagues, was able to pro- he went to work in the studio of his stepuncle Robert
Amsterdam
vide Ter Borch with guidance in a wide range of sub- van Voerst (1597 – 1636), an engraver who worked closely
jects, including dune landscapes, market scenes (see with Anthony van Dyck (1599 – 1641). Although the tim-
Kettering essay, fig. 4), cavalry battles, and ambushes. ing of this trip seems somewhat unusual, it may have
Molijn’s immediate impact on the young artist is evi- been linked to Van Voerst’s royal appointment as
dent in the stylistic transformation of Ter Borch’s land- engraver to Charles I on 23 May 1635.16 In any event, Ter
scape drawings. As of 1634, Ter Borch no longer drew Borch had arrived in London by 3 July 1635, the date of
in his landscape sketchbook with pen but with black a fascinating letter his father sent advising him on the
chalk, Molijn’s preferred medium. Ter Borch found that best course to follow in his artistic career.17 As far as
the soft, broken lines produced by chalk better enabled the elder Ter Borch was concerned, the most important
him to capture the immediacy and varied atmospheric lesson his son learned from Molijn was how to compose
effects of dune landscapes and the broken irregularities “modern” scenes, in which figural groups similar to
fig. 5
6 Wheelock
those found in everyday life were portrayed with a sense social advancement. Nevertheless, despite the overriding
of movement. He urged his son not only to continue to importance of Van Dyck’s portraiture at the English
depict such subjects, but also to paint in a manner that court in the mid-1630s, Ter Borch, either through lack
produced the “most beautiful and flowing” effects. of training or inclination, never seems to have been
Arriving with the letter (and its advice about paint- tempted to follow the Flemish master’s example of
ing), was a trunk filled with clothes and art supplies, painting large-scale portraits. He must also have noted
including brushes, books of paper, black chalk, colors, that royal commissions came in all sizes. For example,
pens, and a manikin, which Ter Borch’s father expressly the Haarlem painter Hendrik Gerritsz Pot (c. 1585 –
encouraged him to use.18 Both the nature of the letter 1657), whom Ter Borch may have met while studying
and the character of the material sent indicate that the with Pieter Molijn, had painted small-scale portraits of
father expected his son to stay for an extended period the king and his family when he had been attached to
in London, where he would be able to paint figural the English court in the early 1630s. When Ter Borch
scenes similar to those he had made in Haarlem. Unfor- began painting portraits, it was Hendrik Pot’s example
tunately, little seems to have come of these plans and rather than Van Dyck’s that he chose to emulate (see
Ter Borch was back in Zwolle by April 1636.19 cat. 4, fig. 2).21
The trip to London, however, was not without If portraiture was of great interest to Ter Borch, so
its benefits. Undoubtedly it introduced Gerard the also was genre painting, and he pursued both side by
Younger to a type of elegance and refinement that he
had never previously encountered. Aside from his prox-
imity to the English court, he had an extraordinary
opportunity to watch his stepuncle while he engraved
after Van Dyck’s refined portraits, not only of the king
and queen, but also of scholars, collectors, and artists —
figures that were to be included in Van Dyck’s print
series The Iconography. Van Voerst himself was to be
included in that elite company, and Ter Borch was able
to study the drawing Van Dyck made for this portrait,
learning in the process how Van Dyck conferred a sense
of grace and elegance on his sitters. Ter Borch’s chalk
drawing of his uncle (fig. 6) is his only work of art sur-
viving from the London sojourn.20
Ter Borch learned another lesson from his experi-
ences in London that he never forgot: the ability of a
painter of aristocrats (such as Van Dyck) to elevate his
own social standing. From this time on, portraiture,
as well as the depiction of “modern” life, was to be an
important component of his artistic career, not only
because he found that he was talented in this realm but
also because he recognized its potential for his own
fig. 6

side for most of his career. While his interest in genre ers, explored this fascinating underworld in their paint-
painting may have begun in Amsterdam in 1632 and ings and drawings. The most important member of this
developed in Haarlem in 1633 and 1634, it benefited fur- group was Pieter van Laer (c. 1592 – 1642), a Haarlem
ther from the inspiration of the Antwerp painter David artist who was in Rome from 1625 to 1639. When he
Teniers II (1610 – 1690). Although no documents con- joined this artist’s society, he was given the nickname
firm that Ter Borch visited Antwerp on his return Bamboccio (clumsy doll), and the painters working in
trip to Zwolle, such a trip in the fall of 1635 seems prob- this low-life tradition came to be called Bamboccianti.
able given the character of Ter Borch’s earliest signed Although it would seem that Ter Borch, intent upon
and dated painting, The Consultation (cat. 2) of 1635, depicting “modern” scenes, would have gravitated
which is thematically, compositionally, and stylistically toward Van Laer’s subject matter, there is no indication
indebted to a painting by Teniers (cat. 2, fig. 1). And of either the Bamboccianti or Roman ruins in his work.
family connections may have pulled Ter Borch to Thus, on balance, it seems unlikely that Ter Borch ever
Antwerp, just as they had to London. Ter Borch’s visited Rome.
mother was a native of Antwerp and her brother, Aert Ter Borch’s visit to Spain, however, can be substan-
de Bonte, still lived there.22 Ter Borch almost certainly tiated by a number of references, not only Houbraken’s
painted The Consultation after that visit, probably when statement, but also a poem written in 1654 by Joost
he was back in Zwolle.23 Roldanus, a schoolmaster from Zwolle, on the occasion
Gerard the Younger’s stay in Zwolle in the mid- of Ter Borch’s marriage to Geertruyt Matthys (1612 –
1630s did not last long. He apparently set out for Spain c. 1672). Roldanus relates that Ter Borch’s paintings
in 1637, perhaps, as a number of authors have argued, by were highly esteemed in the royal palace in Madrid,
way of Italy. However, the evidence that Ter Borch trav- where the king himself (Philip IV) sat for the artist.25
eled to Spain via Italy is extremely slim, even though Although this portrait is no longer extant, an autograph
the logic for such a trip seems compelling. It stems pri- replica, either painted in the Southern Netherlands on
marily from a statement by Arnold Houbraken, who his return to the Dutch Republic, or later after he had
notes in his early eighteenth-century biography of the returned to the Netherlands in the early 1640s, seems
artist that Ter Borch traveled to many lands, including to confirm Roldanus’ account.26 In this full-length but
Germany, Italy, England, France, Spain, and the Nether- small-scale portrait, Philip’s hair and costume are con-
lands.24 We could well imagine that Gerard the Elder sistent with his appearance in the late 1630s.
would have recommended that his son follow his foot- Many fascinating questions surround this trip and
steps to Rome, where he had spent such profitable years its impact on Ter Borch’s subsequent career, in particu-
in the first decade of the seventeenth century. Rome’s lar the apparent influence of Diego Velázquez (1599 –
appeal, moreover, had not dimmed in the interim, 1660) on his portrait style. Although no documents
although its attractions were more diverse for artists exist to confirm that contact existed between Velázquez
of the son’s generation. and the young Dutch artist, it seems that Ter Borch
Netherlandish artists of the 1630s went to Rome did not escape Velázquez’ overriding presence in the
not only to study its ancient ruins but also to explore its Spanish court. He must have recognized in Velázquez’
diverse street life, which teemed with gamblers, ven- portraits the forceful presence of the sitters, which the
dors, and beggars. An active artist community called Spanish master conveyed through both pose and pal-
the Bentvueghels, which comprised primarily foreign- ette (fig. 7). Although Ter Borch worked on a small
8 Wheelock
scale, he quickly emulated the Spanish master’s style, exploited the expressive potential of his sitters’ black 7. Diego Velázquez,
Don Pedro de Barberana
both in his depiction of Philip IV and in the portraits he costumes by starkly silhouetting their forms against the
y Aparregui, c. 1631 –
made immediately after he returned to the Netherlands light-filled but undefined spaces in which they exist. 1633, Kimbell Art
(cats. 4 – 6). These works, small portraits on copper, Ter Borch’s whereabouts during the early 1640s Museum, Fort Worth,
Texas
have a remarkable physical and psychological presence, is not documented. Judging from a few collaborative
not just because of the artist’s sensitive characterization works he painted with Pieter Molijn (cat. 7), he had
of the sitters’ faces, but also because of their command- reestablished contact with the artistic community in
ing poses. Following Velázquez’ lead, Ter Borch also Haarlem once he returned to the Netherlands. However,
as he also painted guardroom scenes in the manner of
Pieter Codde and Willem Duyster during those years,
and portrayed such distinguished Amsterdam aristo-
crats as Jan Six, it seems probable that he resided in
that burgeoning metropolitan center rather than in
Haarlem.27 Amsterdam was a fascinating place in the
mid-1640s, for the prospect of peace in the ongoing
conflict with Spain was close at hand. With its mercan-
tile interests at heart, Amsterdam spearheaded the
negotiations for a peace treaty (eventually signed in
Münster on 15 May 1648), which established the United
Provinces as a free and sovereign territory.
Ter Borch, whose refined portrait style had won
the confidence of important political and social figures
in Amsterdam, was invited to accompany the delegates
to Münster to record the ceremony during which the
treaty was signed (cat. 13). Whether implicitly or explic-
itly, Ter Borch’s presence was probably also sought
because of his prior experiences in the Spanish court,
which would have made him an acceptable artist in the
eyes of the Spanish delegates. Ter Borch made a number
of small oval portraits on copper of members of the
Dutch delegation, including a portrait of Adriaen Pauw
van Heemstede, the powerful pensionary of Holland
who headed up the delegation negotiating on behalf of
the provinces of Holland and West Friesland (cat. 8).
Ter Borch also made comparable portraits of the Span-
ish emissaries, including the Count of Peñaranda, who
was in charge of the Spanish delegation (cat. 12). Even
more remarkably, it seems that Ter Borch joined the
Count of Peñaranda’s entourage after the signing of
fig. 7

the treaty and traveled with him to Brussels. It is even in their merry company paintings, and Adriaen Brou-
probable that he was knighted and received a gold chain wer (1605/1606 – 1638) and David Teniers in their pen-
and a medal of the king at the Brussels court in appre- etrating studies of peasant life. However vital these
ciation for his service to the Spanish delegation.28 visual traditions were to Ter Borch’s pictorial approach
By late 1648 Ter Borch was once again in the Neth- in the late 1640s and early 1650s, he nevertheless trans-
erlands, primarily Amsterdam and Zwolle, where he formed them radically to create works that spoke an
continued to find demand for his sensitive, small-scale entirely different language.
portraits of individual sitters, pendants of spouses, and In Ter Borch’s genre scenes, we never confuse the
family groups. At the same time he also developed an protagonists as representative types — such as those
entirely new form of genre painting that would prove found in images by Goltzius, Buytewech, or Teniers,
to be his most significant contribution to the history where figures belong to a realm slightly removed from
of Dutch art. Larger in scale than his earlier paintings the reality of everyday experience. Ter Borch’s figures
of military life, these works depict figures involved in are real people: he studied their faces, mining them for
domestic activities and shown from a close vantage the emotional implications of fleeting expressions
point. Almost as an unseen protagonist, we as viewers before capturing them in paint with the sensitivity of
often engage in the scene by peering over one of the a portrait painter (fig. 8). He explored their body lan-
figures’ shoulders (cat. 16). We become immersed in guage, finding in their poses and gestures a world of
the human dynamics of the situation, recognizing both conflicting human emotions, usually understated and
its fluidity and unresolved character. These compel- unrecognized by even the most observant eyes. Even
lingly tender and personal images are hauntingly evoca- though the settings of such scenes remain undefined,
tive in the way they capture both the ambiguity and Ter Borch enhanced the sense of immediacy with his
uncertainty of life, even in moments of apparent joy sensitive renderings of materials, whether the nap of a
and fulfillment. woolen tablecloth, the polished wooden body of an old
Just how and when Ter Borch came to this new man’s guitar, or the satiny sheen of a woman’s dress.
form of genre painting are not entirely clear, since no Finally, he instinctively created recognizable scenarios
real precedent exists for it in Dutch art. It probably for these personal encounters, ones where the situa-
evolved from a fortuitous combination of visual stimuli, tions and emotions depicted would have been known
intellectual and emotional maturity, and human con- and felt by all who came into contact with these images.
tacts. After the signing of the Treaty of Münster, Ter Perhaps some artistic precedent for these works
Borch seems to have recognized that scenes of soldiers exists, but none is immediately evident. They differ fun-
spending idle time in barracks were no longer a current damentally from genre scenes by his contemporaries,
topic of concern. More appealing to him, and presum- exhibiting neither the sensuality of a merry company
ably to the art market, were scenes that depicted card scene by Gerard van Honthorst (1590 – 1656), nor the
playing and drinking in a domestic rather than military detailed refinement of a work by Gerard Dou (1613 –
context. In this respect, he returned to themes that 1675), nor the outward exuberance of a painting by Jan
had intrigued Dutch and Flemish artists from the late Steen (1625/1626 – 1679). Ter Borch also structured his
sixteenth- and early seventeenth-centuries — from genre scenes differently than did most other genre
Hendrik Goltzius in his prints and drawings of the five painters. He never employed a narrative device known
senses, to Esaias van de Velde and Willem Buytewech as a doorsien, which allows us to glimpse into a second-
10 Wheelock
ary space, often through an open doorway, with figures But a more satisfying explanation may be found for 8. W
oman Spinning (detail
of cat. 20)
or objects that amplify the painting’s main focus.29 Ter Borch’s remarkable transformation of genre tradi-
One artist whose works do appear to have inspired tions. Upon returning to Zwolle in the late 1640s he
Ter Borch at this stage of his career was Michael Sweerts found himself outside the mainstream of artistic tradi-
(1618 – 1664), a Flemish artist working in the tradition of tions unfolding in Haarlem, Amsterdam, Leiden, and
the Bamboccianti in Rome. Sweerts painted some very Utrecht, let alone in Rome and Antwerp. In Zwolle, he
direct and emotionally poignant half-length portrayals re-entered family life, which now consisted of his father
of the working class in the 1640s, including women and stepmother, Wiesken Matthys, and various siblings
spinning yarn and mothers removing head lice (cat. 28, interested in art and poetry, including his half sisters
fig. 1). Such depictions call to mind Ter Borch’s sensitive Anna and Gesina, and half brothers Harmen and
portrayals of individuals engaged in domestic activi- Moses. All evidence points to a closely bonded family,
ties.30 About 1650, a number of Sweerts’ Dutch patrons one that proudly supported Gerard the Younger’s artis-
in Rome returned to Amsterdam, where Ter Borch tic aspirations and helped him — whether directly or
could well have seen these paintings.31 indirectly — define the types of subjects that best suited
his capabilities. It was within that context that Ter
Borch grounded his moral framework and found his
most compelling models, not only because he knew
each of the family members well, but also because he
seems to have been touched by the warmth of their per-
sonal relationships. Many of Ter Borch’s most moving
paintings from this period of his life depict gestures and
expressions of caring and concern amongst members
of this extended family, whether between mother and
child or between a child and his dog (cats. 19, 28).
The world encompassed by this family, however,
was not limited to Zwolle or to morally uplifting ideals
compatible with those found in the Bible and the writ-
ings of Jacob Cats (1577 – 1660). The father’s literary
interests, his awareness and writing of poetry, and his
involvement in illustrating songbooks resonated in his
children, most fully in Gesina, who became passionately
involved in copying, writing, and illustrating poems,
songs, and emblematic literature. She was about seven-
teen when Gerard the Younger returned to Zwolle, and
a palpable relationship between the two quickly evolved.
Already at this young age, Gesina was enthralled by
Petrarchan concepts of love: the complexities, worries,
and disappointments that accompanied the search for
a true and lasting love.32 These love laments were fre-
fig. 8
11 t h e a r t i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t o f g e r a r d t e r b o r c h
9. Gesina ter Borch, quently expressed in early seventeenth-century Dutch arrival of a letter (cat. 23). It is impossible to determine
A Gentleman Kneeling
songbooks and emblematic literature by, among others, how much of this new direction in Ter Borch’s subject
before a Young Lady,
1659, brush in black Jan Hermansz Krul (1601/1602 – 1646). Gesina’s own matter was his own doing, and how much was the
and various colors, reflections, in verse and in drawings (fig. 9), are found result of discussions within the family, particularly with
heightened with gold
washed with egg in her poetry book, which she began to compile in the Gesina. Clearly, however, a remarkable synergy existed
white, Rijksprenten late 1640s.33 between his pictorial ideas and those evident in his
kabinet, Amsterdam
(poetry album, Young, attractive, and emotionally sensitive, family’s literary pursuits. A particularly fascinating
fol. 29r) Gesina became Ter Borch’s favorite model by the early area of shared interest concerns color symbolism. In
10. A ttributed to Gonza 1650s, inevitably playing a role in paintings that reso- 1659 Gesina included in her poetry album a list of color
les Coques, Portrait nated with these very issues. Many of these works focus symbols, which, to judge from Ter Borch’s genre scenes
of a Man Receiving
a Letter, c. 1660, oil
upon those moments of anticipation prior to a meeting from the late 1650s and early 1660s, were also known by
on panel, Collection of lovers (cat. 16), or upon uncertainties caused by the him. The symbolism of the colors of the women’s dresses
Pieter C.W.M. Drees
mann, London
seems to relate directly to the narrative scenario being
depicted in a number of these works, including, for
example, A Lady at Her Toilet (cat. 34).34 In this list
of color symbols blue is equated with jealousy, an emo-
tion also suggested by the lady’s actions and facial
expression.
Ter Borch’s intimate relationship with his extended
family was affected by his marriage on 14 February
1654 to Geertruyt Matthys, a widow who was his step
mother’s sister. Geertruyt lived in Deventer and Ter
Borch moved in the year of his marriage to the old
Hanse town on the banks of the river IJssel. Deventer
and Zwolle were not that far apart and, based on their
frequent appearances as models in his paintings, Ter
Borch retained close relationships with Gesina and his
other siblings after his move. Nevertheless, the charac-
ter of his art after leaving Zwolle changed noticeably.
Not only did formal portraiture assume a far greater
role in his oeuvre but genre scenes took on a different
character. Instead of middle-class domestic scenes, he
featured elegant social settings and refined figures
belonging to the wealthy, patrician class.
Gerard the Younger seems to have transitioned
seamlessly to this new world. He quickly entered
Deventer society, achieving partial citizen’s rights
in 1655 and full citizenship about a decade later. He
became a gemeensman (city counselor), representing
fig. 9
12 Wheelock
one of the town’s eight wards in 1666, and as such drawing. Such a sequential process of execution could
belonged to a municipal body, the gezworen gemeente allow the participation of a studio assistant, who, in this
(sworn community), which advised the powerful town instance, could have been called upon to add the cloth-
council. Ter Borch may have been so fully welcomed ing after the master had modeled the faces. Thus far,
into this community because his wife and relatives of however, technical assessments have distinguished no
her former husband belonged to the regent class and differences of hand in Ter Borch’s paintings, with one
were connected socially to Deventer’s close-knit politi- exception — the allegorical portrait of Moses, which the
cal elite. However, he was himself an esteemed figure, artist executed with Gesina (cat. 46).
one who had not only been present at the signing of the At midcentury Deventer was not as vital a town
Treaty of Münster, but also belonged to the retinue of as Zwolle, although it remained an important trading
Adriaen Pauw van Heemstede. Not to be forgotten,
moreover, is the fact that he had portrayed the king of
Spain and been knighted by the Count of Peñaranda,
an honor that Roldanus emphasized in his 1654 poem
celebrating the wedding of Ter Borch and Geertruyt
Matthys.35
Demand for Ter Borch’s paintings seems to have
been strong from the outset, for soon after arriving in
Deventer he took on the first of his students, Caspar
Netscher (c. 1636 – 1684), a talented young artist who
also served as a model in many of Ter Borch’s genre
scenes from the mid-to-late 1650s (cat. 30).36 Other stu-
dents followed, including Pieter van Anraadt (1640 –
1678) and Roelof Koets (before 1650 – 1725), but exactly
what role they played in the production of Ter Borch’s
paintings is little understood.37 Perhaps they were
responsible for some of the many copies that were made
of Ter Borch’s compositions — we know Caspar made a
free adaptation of his master’s The Consultation in 1659.38
They may also have filled in subsidiary elements in his
portraits, such as tables and chairs, which often lack the
sensitivity of modeling found in the figures themselves.
A painting attributed to Gonzales Coques (1614
or 1618 – 1684) reveals information about an artistic pro-
cess that Ter Borch may have followed, particularly in
his portraits (fig. 10). In this unfinished portrait/genre
scene we see that the artist painted the background
elements and faces first, and left unpainted the figures’
bodies, whose forms are indicated by the chalk under-
fig. 10
center with a cosmopolitan flavor thanks to its highly fully embraced. As a genre painter, however, Ter Borch
regarded center for advanced learning, the Deventer apparently felt released from such constraints and
Athenaeum. The town held tightly to tradition and con- sought to portray those human emotions that occur at
servative values, qualities that Ter Borch readily appre- unexpected moments, when a person’s inner character
ciated and was ready to reinforce in the many portrait is revealed as life’s formal façade falls away. The more
commissions he received. The style of portraiture that that Ter Borch satisfied the conservative pictorial ideals
he developed was straightforward: his figures pose, of the Deventer elite in his portraits during the 1650s
often full length, with stately formality.39 The settings and 1660s, the more he developed this more intimate
he created for these intimately scaled portraits are aspect of his genre scenes. He favored subjects in which
remarkable for their lack of embellishment; chairs, he could express a sense of anticipation arising from
tables, and bookshelves, when included, remain visually social situations: greetings at doorways (cat. 30), musi-
subordinate to the figures, who are generally, but not cal ensembles (cats. 47, 48), and the writing and receiv-
always, dressed in somber black. Ter Borch’s intent was ing of letters (cats. 32, 33). He never explained (or even
clearly to present an exacting likeness of the sitter and, intimated) the outcome of such activities and encoun-
at the same time, to reflect the sitter’s status as a mem- ters, thereby providing us with the opportunity to
ber of the ruling elite. engage in the scene, to ponder and discuss its implica-
One exceptional painting that Ter Borch created tions. Ter Borch occasionally enhanced the sense of
during his Deventer years was a large group portrait, ambiguity in his genre scenes by turning one of the
The Town Council of Deventer, which he painted for the major protagonists away from us and thus further
town hall in 1667 (cat. 44). It is a somber painting: for- obscuring the figure’s emotional state of mind (cat. 27).
mal, symmetrical, and hierarchical — a statement of the Ter Borch’s fame, however, rests not exclusively on
sense of dignity and responsibility felt by this delibera- the sensitivity of his portraits or on the psychological
tive body. In the overriding sense of common purpose nuances of his genre scenes. Even in his own day, con-
conveyed by this composition, we find much of the noisseurs and painters alike marveled at his ability to
character of the society for which Ter Borch painted. paint fabrics, particularly satin.41 Although his earliest
At the same time, this painting demonstrates the art- work demonstrates a remarkable ability to render dif-
ist’s ability and willingness to devise a compositional ferent materials, he did not develop his distinctive man-
mode that reflects his patron’s concerns and ideals. Ter ner of painting fine fabrics — one that has never been
Borch seemingly conceived this work in concert with replicated — until the 1650s. How he managed to cap-
the frame maker Derck Daniels, whose elaborate gold ture the sheen and translucency of satin remains a mat-
frame containing emblematic symbols of justice, civic ter of discussion.42 Judging from microscopic analysis,
virtue, and affluence indicated the values and responsi- Ter Borch delicately modeled the surfaces of the mate-
bilities of the council.40 rial with remarkably free brushstrokes that blend effort-
As a portraitist, Ter Borch was no groundbreaking lessly together. Such a surface treatment could only be
rebel interested in devising ways to suggest the dynamic effective if it were built upon a firm foundation formed
interactions of individuals, as had Frans Hals (c. 1582/ from an intimate knowledge of the material’s structure
1583 – 1666) or Rembrandt van Rijn (1606 – 1669). Rather, and the rhythms of its folds. To establish such a founda-
Ter Borch was an artist who sought to reinforce those tion, Ter Borch must have studied the character of
values of moderation and restraint that his patrons so the materials he depicted from life and then recorded
14 Wheelock
his observations on his panel or canvas supports.43 stood. In Delft both Vermeer and Pieter de Hooch 11. The Suitor’s Visit
(detail of cat. 30)
Although no careful drapery studies, either drawings or (1629 – 1684) were influenced by Ter Borch’s genre
oil sketches, are known, their existence can be postu- scenes. Indeed on 22 April 1653, two days after Ver- 12. A Lady at Her Toilet
lated because he depicted figures wearing identical meer’s wedding, Ter Borch and Vermeer cosigned a (detail of cat. 34)
dresses in various paintings (figs. 11, 12). Thus as a document in Delft, in which they acted as witnesses
mature artist, Ter Borch must have utilized replicating to an “act of surety” between a captain in the service
techniques similar to those that his father taught him of the States General, stationed in Den Briel, and
and his siblings. the widow (?) of the former governor of Den Briel.44
Ter Borch and his paintings seem to have been well Although this document raises the possibility that Ter
known beyond Zwolle and Deventer during his lifetime, Borch, who may have been in The Hague painting his
but just how he established his market in artistic cen- portrait of Jan van Goyen (cat. 21), came to Delft for
ters outside the province of Overijssel is little under- Vermeer’s wedding, it does not explain how the two
fig. 11 fig. 12
artists came to know each other. Their acquaintance returned to Deventer after those forces had been
may have come through the individuals involved in the expelled in 1674.50 Ter Borch was unable to finish the
deposition, through the notary Willem de Langue, who second portrait in Deventer and thus had to travel to
was present at the signing of the document, or through the court in The Hague to complete it, at which time
the Amsterdam art dealer Johannes Renialme, who he also painted a portrait of Princess Mary.51 Ter
handled paintings by both masters.45 Indeed, Ter Borch Borch’s renown was by then so widespread that in 1676
seems to have painted his genre scenes primarily for an Cosimo III de’ Medici commissioned the artist to paint
Amsterdam market. His paintings were familiar to a a self-portrait for his gallery of artists in Florence.52
number of Amsterdam artists in the 1650s and 1660s, One of the most interesting commissions Ter
including Gabriel Metsu (1629 – 1667), Eglon van der Borch received in his waning years was not for a new
Neer (c. 1634 – 1703), and Michiel van Musscher (1645 – work, but for the restoration of his 1667 group portrait
1705).46 The latter two artists made copies of Ter Borch’s of the Deventer magistrates (cat. 44), which may have
paintings, perhaps at the request of Amsterdam art become dirty with grime or been damaged during the
dealers who sought to fill a demand for his elegant town’s occupation during the mid-1670s.53 The artist
depictions of women wearing satin dresses.47 continued to paint until the very last year of his life,
While Ter Borch quite possibly spent more time in completing his compelling portraits of the preacher Jan
Amsterdam in the late 1660s after the death of his wife, van Duren and his wife Lucretia Rouse in 1680 and 1681
he was certainly there in about 1670, when he painted (cats. 51, 52).
portraits of Nicolaes Pancras, an Amsterdam burgo- Ter Borch died in Deventer on 8 December 1681.
master, his wife, and son Gerbrand (cat. 49).48 Although True to his wishes, his body was returned to Zwolle,
Ter Borch’s intimate scale of portraiture was unlike the where he was buried near his father in the Sint Michaels
large-scale, boldly executed paintings of such Amster- kerk. On the tomb are inscribed words Gesina lovingly
dam artists as Bartholomeus van der Helst (c. 1613 – penned to celebrate the artist’s life: “Here below lies a
1670), the Pancras commissions demonstrate that his world’s wonder,/ Greatly esteemed in every land,/ That
reputation as a painter of the political elite was not his art was truly known.”54 Gesina’s poem then describes
restricted to Deventer. Ter Borch apparently lived in the renown of her brother’s group portrait of the Treaty
Amsterdam between 1672 and 1674 when Deventer was of Münster (cat. 13) and his associations with the Count
overtaken by forces from Münster and Cologne allied of Peñaranda (cat. 12) and the king of Spain.
with the French during their invasion of the Nether- Gesina, who knew her half brother and his work
lands. During these years in Amsterdam he painted a extremely well, chose in her eulogistic poem to empha-
series of portraits for the powerful De Graeff family.49 size that her brother’s fame rested on the importance of
Ter Borch returned to Deventer in the winter of his portraits and his associations with Spanish nobility.
1674 as one of its leading citizens — his fame certified by Houbraken likewise celebrated the painter’s associa-
his outstanding career as a portraitist and genre painter tions with the nobility, including a number of anecdotes
and by his involvement in civic affairs. The prince of that demonstrate the rapport Ter Borch enjoyed with
Orange, Willem III, was twice painted by the artist: such notables. In one, the Count of Peñaranda and Ter
once at the request of the burgomasters when the Borch discuss the artist’s tendency to whistle while he
prince visited Deventer in May 1672 to try to defend the painted, and in others, the artist chats with the prince
town against enemy forces, and again when the prince of Orange on a variety of subjects during the latter’s
16 Wheelock
many sittings for his portraits.55 Aside from a short dis- to convey a sense of dignity and purpose for his sitters
cussion of Ter Borch’s remarkable ability to depict satin, without idealizing or aggrandizing their appearance or
Houbraken’s entire biographical overview focuses on station in life. His genre scenes, conversely, speak to
the artist’s portraits. Neither Gesina nor Houbraken different needs and different sets of circumstances.
discuss Ter Borch’s genre scenes, which is quite inter- They are windows into life’s other (personal) side, show-
esting given the renown these paintings enjoy today. ing those unguarded moments of caring and concern,
Indeed, by the early nineteenth century John Smith dis- of uncertainty, anticipation, and inner anxiety. In fact,
counted Ter Borch’s portraits as works he had executed both types of paintings succeed for the same reasons.
for financial gain, lamenting that the artist had thereby His portraits no less than his genre scenes are compel-
not painted more “fancy subjects” of the type this con- ling because of his ability to convey the naturalism of
noisseur clearly preferred.56 surface and texture (including the sheen of satin) and
Despite the separate ways in which these two because of his profound understanding of the complex-
aspects of Ter Borch’s oeuvre have been perceived over ities of human psychology. Only by bringing these two
the years, they derive from the same artistic impulse. aspects of Ter Borch’s oeuvre together can the full
Ter Borch was a perceptive portraitist who understood depth and range of his artistic genius be understood.
the ideals and aspirations of the patrons for whom he
worked. Within a generally intimate format, he was able
18 Kettering
Gerard ter Borch
and the Modern Manner
19 g e r a r d t e r b o r c h a n d t h e m o d e r n m a n n e r
In 1635, when Gerard ter Borch the Younger temporary dress, ordinary activities, and localized set-
was just seventeen years old and fresh from his appren- tings. In art history, the word is typically associated
ticeship in Haarlem, he journeyed to London to join with those nineteenth-century movements that began
his uncle, the engraver Robert van Voerst. After a few with Gustave Courbet or Edouard Manet. It is also
months, the young man’s father sent him a trunk applied to twentieth-century schools too numerous
packed with art supplies and personal necessities. to name. When placed in a broader cultural context,
Along with the supplies came a letter containing one “modern” operates more complexly as code for a whole
provocative bit of artistic advice: “And when you wish range of ideas generated in an outpouring of writings,
to paint, work up some modern compositions [ordo both critical and ideological, from the nineteenth and
nantsij van modarn], as you surely can, putting in twentieth centuries. To the French critic Charles
your stuff right from the start, because that goes most Baudelaire in the 1860s, for example, “modern” meant
quickly and stays most beautiful and flowing while dry- a particular attitude to the present (as ironically heroic),
ing.”1 The recommendation certainly had its technical a way of experiencing life in terms of the casual, mar-
aspects, referring both to compositional construction ginal, ephemeral, and fugitive. He wanted to see this
and to application of paint. But it also dealt with subject experience of contemporaneity, this connection to the
matter — the son should continue to produce “modern” contingencies of actual life, represented in a radically
subjects, compositions from everyday life, as he had new manner by an untraditional, abstracting pictorial
learned to do in Haarlem. Gerard the Elder was an treatment. Baudelaire contrasted “modern art” with
accomplished artist in his own right and his talented French nineteenth-century academic art, which pre-
son’s first teacher. There is little doubt that Gerard the ferred a polished execution of historical subjects,
Younger took his words to heart. favored idealized figures, and celebrated the eternal
Encountering the term “modern” in this personal verities.3 The French leftist critic Theophile Thoré, writ-
context is exceptional. It is usually found in more for- ing at about the same time under the name W. Bürger,
mal documents such as inventory and lottery records. found his contrast to modernity in Italian High Renais-
For example, inventories of 1634 and 1636 listed several sance painting (the foundation of academic painting).
“modern paintings” by Dirck Hals. Another inventory, Interestingly, Thoré located the roots of modernity in
1639, recorded a “modern” piece by Willem Buytewech Dutch art of the seventeenth century. For him, six-
and “an interior by P.Codde, modern.”2 These painters, teenth-century Italian painting looked backward while
along with others residing in Haarlem and Amsterdam, Dutch art looked forward. By this he meant forward to
specialized in scenes of merry companies. Such scenes — an art whose images were “true” to their society and
groups of figures engaged in a popular activity and culture, an art directly engaged with contemporary life.4
wearing contemporary dress — had all the requisite ele-
ments to be called modern by Gerard the Elder or by
anyone else. But how was this term generally used in The Seventeenth-Century Dutch Modern Mode
the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic, and did Trained as an artist not as a critic, Gerard the Elder
Gerard the Younger live up to his father’s advice? lived at a time and place with little interest in formal
Today, at the simplest level, “modern” connotes writing about art. His letter belongs to a genre different
anything up-to-date and of-the-present. When applied from nineteenth- and twentieth-century critical texts
to figurative painting, it refers to works featuring con- with their polemical language and self-conscious for-
20 Kettering
mulations. His use of “modern” was neither moral nor Mander, Angel revealed little bias for or against any of 1. Title page, from
Philips Angel, Lof
theoretical. Nevertheless, since such a term always sug- the genres, including history painting. On the contrary,
der schilder-konst
gests an opposite, we might well ponder the unspoken he matter-of-factly included the lowly guardroom scene (Leiden, 1642)
preferences that Gerard the Elder may have been among the types of subjects he found to be ideal for
expressing. Possibly he was advising against further showing off mimetic effects, for example, the rendering
engagement with landscape, the specialty of his son’s of shiny armor, smoke, and fire. Without ever using the
Haarlem master. Just as likely, he was steering his son word modernity, Angel defined an important aspect of
away from history painting — the rendering of narra- it for his milieu — the achievement of the effect of the
tives from classical antiquity or the Bible. Yet Gerard “almost real,” as evidenced in the works of his fellow
the Elder, who had hardly disdained either landscapes painters. His address helps to flesh out Gerard the Elder’s
or histories in his youth, had tutored his sons in both comment. The modern sort of composition entailed, in
subjects. In this period of rising national consciousness, addition to subject matter, a formal approach that em-
the Dutch had increasingly come to value images that phasized the skillful imitation of natural appearances.
emphasized visible forms and everyday activities. Noth- For an explicit articulation of modernism — beyond
ing said “made in Holland” like a merry company wear- descriptive adjectives — we have to wait until the publi-
ing Dutch attire in a recognizable setting. Given the cation of Gerard de Lairesse’s Het groot schilderboek
public enthusiasm for these genre works, Gerard the (The Art of Painting) in 1707 (fig. 2). But it is important
Elder may have written his letter with probable direc-
tions in the art market uppermost in his mind. Thus,
like the notaries charged with listing genre works in
current collections, he found the term “modern” to be
useful shorthand for describing this new type of paint-
ing. Far from raising a battle cry, he was offering his son
eminently practical advice.
Almost no developed formulations of a seven-
teenth-century idea of modernity survive. However, we
do find hints close in time to Gerard the Elder’s letter.
In 1642, Philips Angel published his address to the
painters’ community of Leiden, Lof der schilder-konst
(In Praise of the Art of Painting) (fig. 1).5 Although filled
with learned references to antiquity, the text drew less
on humanistic art theory than upon Angel’s and his
fellow artists’ practical experience and attitudes. He
articulated the components of good painting as he saw
them practiced by Leiden artists working in a variety of
specialties, and expressed his particular admiration for
an accomplished technique. Angel certainly knew Karel
van Mander’s humanistically grounded Schilder-boeck
(Book of Painting) (1603 – 1604).6 But in contrast to Van
fig. 1
2. I llustration, from to note that De Lairesse had last viewed actual Dutch itability of genre painting and wrote about it to improve
Gerard de Lairesse,
paintings many years earlier, between the later 1660s it. While inveighing against the “low modern” of peas-
Het groot schilderboek,
2 vols. (Amsterdam, and 1680s, before he went blind and turned to treatise ant pieces, guardroom scenes, and brothels, he encour-
1707), 1:53 writing.7 By the early eighteenth century, art theory had aged “the elegant modern manner” featuring urban
3. Gerard ter Borch, reasserted a humanistic orientation under the influence burghers fashionably outfitted, yet modest and deco-
Young People around a of French theoretical treatises. Accordingly, De Lairesse rous in demeanor.8 Most remarkably, De Lairesse
Table Drinking, Smoking,
and Making Music, 1632, proclaimed his admiration for elevated subjects from admitted that narratives involving these sorts of figures
pencil and brown ink history as rendered by universalized figure types emit- could, like “antique” narratives, engage fundamental
on paper, Rijksprenten
kabinet, Amsterdam ting noble emotions, a type of art he summed up by the human emotions. In an especially interesting section,
term “antiquity.” This he pitted against “modernity,” a he described two elegant table scenes — one involving
4. P ieter Molijn, Grote
Markt, Haarlem, at Night,
mode that he denigrated for its engagement with the women drinking tea, the other, men sharing wine —
c. 1625, oil on panel, ephemeral and casual. Nevertheless, De Lairesse did each narrative exhibiting a subtle range of “passions.”9
Stadhuis, Haarlem,
On loan to Frans Hals
acknowledge the importance of “modernity” — contem- This last passage is particularly significant for our pur-
Museum porary subject matter — for seventeenth-century Dutch poses because Gerard ter Borch made the “elegant mod-
artists and their public. In essence he accepted the inev- ern manner” his specialty. In his mature paintings of
5. F rans Hals, Banquet
in a Park, c. 1610, oil the 1650s and 1660s, both the tone and the subtle narra-
on panel, formerly tive action often match perfectly with the approach
Staatliche Museen zu
Berlin — Preussischer subsequently advocated by De Lairesse.
Kulturbesitz,
Gemäldegalerie
Ter Borch’s Early Figurative Groups

Gerard the Younger’s first efforts at “modern composi-
tion” can be found in drawings of smokers, music mak-
ers, and people in conversation (fig. 3). While studying
in Haarlem from 1634 to 1635, he drew numerous open-
air skating and market scenes.10 His teacher Pieter Molijn,
though primarily a landscape painter, had himself exe-
cuted a few such outdoor figurative scenes (fig. 4),
roughly comparable to the (better-known) company
pictures by Willem Buytewech, Esaias van de Velde,
Frans Hals (fig. 5), Dirck Hals, and Pieter Codde. Like
the history works from which they derived, the Haar-
lem and Amsterdam merry companies showed tremen-
dous variety in their activities and props. But in con-
trast to history paintings, they detailed quite quotidian
entertainments. Their figures employed familiar ges-
tures and postures, wore identifiably current costumes,
and were surrounded by common objects. As many
scholars have remarked, the rapid rise in popularity of
fig. 2
22 Kettering
fig. 3 fig. 5
fig. 4
6. Willem Duyster, this type of work during the second and third decades one of the subgenres that developed quickly in these
The Maurauders,
of the seventeenth century indicates a dramatic change years.13 Typically they thematized subjugation and
c. 1628 – 1632, oil
on panel, Musée of direction for Dutch art.11 domination, or sartorial display, and were often ironic
du Louvre, Paris We can assume (from the implication in his father’s or semicomical in tone. Ter Borch’s paintings share for-
7. Gerard ter Borch, letter) that much of Ter Borch’s painted output from his mal aspects with the genre, including the dispersal of
The Game of Back- early years has disappeared. Certainly his one signed many figures across a horizontal foreground plane and

gammon, c. 1640, oil
on panel, Kunsthalle, painting from the period, The Consultation (cat. 2), a preoccupation with the color, texture, and detail of
Bremen 1635, bears little resemblance to the merry companies the soldiers’ attire. But Gerard’s works differ in their
8. Gerard ter Borch, of his older Haarlem contemporaries. Yet even though calm tone, principally the result of his orderly composi-
Le Gallant Militaire, painted at this early stage, The Consultation demon- tion and his disposition of the figures — an adumbration
1662 – 1663, oil on
canvas, Musée du
strates Ter Borch’s formal expertise in numerous ways: of things to come (fig. 7).
Louvre, Paris his command of drapery, of physiognomic differences, In the 1650s and 1660s, the military picture devel-
of spatial construction, and of textures, particularly his oped into an important category within Ter Borch’s
ability to render light shining through glass and reflect- body of work. He included soldiers and their officers in
ing off the mirror and other shiny surfaces. If we find no over a third of his mature genre paintings. Placing these
jolly revelers here, we surely see figures, setting, and military figures in a great variety of settings and con-
activity fully informed by the “modern” approach. texts, he reworked some inherited formulae, ignored
others, and in the process invented new ways of han-
dling old themes. There is reason to assume that the
Ter Borch’s Military Manner cessation of the Eighty Years’ War contributed to the
Gerard’s first military panel, Horse and Rider (cat. 1) new direction that he and many of his contemporaries
from about 1634, shows a single cavalryman slumped
astride his horse. This image, presenting its subject
incongruously from the back, is as free of convention as
it is accurate in detail. Most likely, it reflects Ter Borch’s
experience of growing up in an Overijssel garrison town
in the presence of actual soldiers — indeed, his experi-
ence of military life is deeper than that of any Holland
artist.12 Closely observed and rendered with such unhe-
roic naturalness, the painting reminds us of Angel’s
emphasis on imitating visual phenomena.
Closer to Gerard the Elder’s idea of the modern are
the guardroom scenes that his son began to produce
several years later (after his return from England and
from a subsequent journey to the Mediterranean). They
bear some resemblance to works by Willem Duyster
(fig. 6) and Pieter Codde, which Gerard the Younger
may have seen during visits to Amsterdam. The corte
gaerdjes (guardrooms), as Angel called them, formed
fig. 6
24 Kettering
the subtlety of the narrative — the empathy with which
Ter Borch handled the young prostitute’s predicament —
makes this rendering of a common theme entirely
uncommon.
Because of its rough-hewn environment, the panel
known as The Unwelcome Call (cat. 23) might also seem
an exception among the genteel works of the 1650s.
Military paraphernalia hang sloppily over the bed at the
rear and rugged stone steps lead onto the rough wooden
floor. Remarkable, however, is the sympathetic indi-
viduality of the officer. Torn between personal concerns
and professional duty, he displays a psychological com-
plexity that no earlier artist had considered appropriate
to a military scene. In a brilliant artistic move, Ter
Borch painted the trumpeter’s colors dancing on the
mirrorlike surface of the soldier’s armor, as if the colors
themselves were transmitting his unhappy message.
fig. 7
took in their approach to military subjects. The tone of

Gerard’s later work shifts from rough to elegant, from
group sociability to evocations of solitude and private
reflection. More refined environments substitute for
the earlier guardroom settings. Officers and trumpeters
replace the earlier mercenary recruits. The military
man relinquishes his role as outsider to become
an insider, welcomed into a more domestic — even
feminine — space.
Exceptions do occur. Three Soldiers Making Merry
(cat. 29) of about 1656 echoes earlier scenes of guard-
room dissipation, conveying its carousing theme with
a welter of flailing diagonals. Yet the upright, compact
composition (favored by Gerard and by many of his
contemporaries throughout this period), the elegant
urban interior, and the nuanced painting technique
serve to temper the rowdiness of the subject. The so-
called Le Gallant Militaire (fig. 8) recalls another famil-
iar theme among earlier artists. The interior is unam-
biguously a high-class bordello, and the relationship of
soldier and civilian is unambiguously commercial. But
fig. 8
9. Ludolf de Jongh, Though bearing bad tidings and standing near the door,
Soldiers at Reveille,
the trumpeter adds a rarefied elegance to the rustic
1655 – 1658, oil
on panel, North atmosphere. The impassive beauty of his image offers a
Carolina Museum painful contrast to the earthy reality of the lover — his
of Art, Raleigh,
Purchased with rough setting and rougher dilemma.
funds from the State Trumpeters figure in eight of Ter Borch’s pictures
of North Carolina
from the 1650s. Like the courier in The Unwelcome Call,
they share little with the stock trumpeters of comic rev-
eille scenes painted by other Dutch artists (fig. 9). In the
Officer Dictating a Letter (cat. 31) and the Officer Writ
ing a Letter (cat. 32), the trumpeters do not interrupt
amorous liaisons, they assist in them. They perform
their duties far from the battlefield and bear messages
having nothing to do with military orders. Their
upright postures, contained silhouettes, and carefully
controlled clothing convey dignity and gentility. In both
pictures their forms are juxtaposed with beds, tying fig. 9
together love and war with a delightful visual pun on
the canopy tents that sixteenth-century armies used in
the field. In the Officer Dictating a Letter, the trumpeter tant aspects of Ter Borch’s persuasive interpretation of
turns his head to look openly toward us. The waiting modernity. Seen in this unexpected context, his innova-
figure in the Officer Writing a Letter, by contrast, casts tions are all the more striking.
an ambiguous glance to the side, inviting us to decipher
its meaning — boredom, dreaminess, or even erotic pre-
occupation. Each courier, brought in to serve the Ter Borch’s Ladies
romantic purposes of another, becomes romantic in Ter Borch’s “modern compositions” featuring women
himself. Each of the officers, whether writing or dictat- have received even greater acclaim over the years than
ing his letter, could hardly engage in a more refined his representations of military life. The juffertjes (pic-
approach to love. Positioned behind a table in both tures with young ladies) share much with the military
works, the officer is a self-effacing figure, nearly as images, including their upright formats and tight com-
folded in upon himself as the sensitive letter writers in positional structures (cats. 27, 30, 34, 35). The settings
Ter Borch’s parallel pictures of women. Typical of Ter are similarly well appointed, the narrations subtle, the
Borch’s genre scenes, the narratives here remain actors few, and their behaviors believable. But even
unspecified, open to interpretation, and conducive to more than the military works, these pictures dazzle
our projections. In this regard, these military scenes by with their surface effects, especially the luminous
Ter Borch contrast with earlier works — especially those gowns worn by the young ladies. Later descriptions of
of other artists — whose stereotyped groupings of stock Ter Borch’s paintings insist on the satin as the sine qua
figures discouraged empathic response. Narrative non of his renderings of women. In this regard, it is fas-
ambiguity and psychological subtlety constitute impor- cinating to find the term “modern” used by Ter Borch’s
26 Kettering
later biographer, Arnold Houbraken, as the perfect an’s body beneath — plays a prominent role in construct
descriptor for these complicated reflecting surfaces.14 ing an ideal of feminine identity.16
Houbraken also called these works “modern” in the Executed a few years later, the so-called Paternal
more familiar sense of the word, citing Eglon van der Admonition (cat. 27) combines the arching neck seen
Neer’s “painted companies,” “dressed in the Modern from behind and the full-length satin dress, though
manner...like Terburg.”15 Although Houbraken did not now the lady participates in a narrative even more com-
explore this juxtaposition of modern figural type and plex and open to interpretation. Some have read the
modern surface description, for him it surely contrib- image as a family drama, others as a scene of high-class
uted to the special pictorial force of Ter Borch’s ladies. prostitution. Its organizing theme, in any case, is a
The characteristic lady wearing satin emerged in courtship ritual of some type. Settling on one interpre-
Gerard’s oeuvre after his return from traveling abroad. tation is complicated, particularly in the Amsterdam
His earlier renderings of military subjects and inns version, by the uneasy overlap of restraint (in the con-
depicted women as camp followers and tavern habitués, tained figure of the lady) and carelessness (in the body
the same roles they played in his first drinking scenes. language of the suitor). Certainly his loose pose, extrav-
In his mature oeuvre, women very occasionally are seen agant hat, sword, and ambiguous gesture invoke linger-
as farm wives, peasant girls, or mothers (cats. 18 – 20, ing negative associations with rough soldiery. The chap-
24 – 26). Far more frequently, they appear as young erone in black has good reason to keep alert. Equally
women of marriageable age, apparently from genteel complex psychologically, and no less refined, are the
society. Ter Borch’s half sister Gesina served as model later images of the lady in satin, whether she is pictured
for many of these ladies, including those in his toilet reading a letter to thoughtful companions, receiving
scenes of about 1650 when she was still a teenager (cats. suitors, or simply absorbed in thoughts of her own
16, 17, 30, 35, 36). The modesty of the girl’s form and the (fig. 10; see also cat. 35, fig. 1).
specificity of her features — fine hair, small eyes, reced- In certain respects, the figure of the trumpeter and
ing chin — gave the scenes a far more positive character the lady in satin function similarly in Ter Borch’s com-
than the censorious toilet scenes by earlier artists, and positions. In the Officer Writing a Letter and A Lady at
allowed their presumably well-to-do viewers an oppor- Her Toilet (cat. 34), for example, note the similarity of
tunity to identify with the depicted figures. The elegant their positioning, the ceremonial accent they provide,
young lady in Woman at a Mirror (cat. 16) is discreetly their outward gaze, their introspection. But these works
presented from behind, so that only the mirror shows construct gender differently. The trumpeter supports an
her facial expression. Functioning as a sort of fourth ideal of masculinity associated with action. He remains
actor within the intimate group, her reflection exhibits passive only momentarily, as his gleaming instrument
an ambiguous emotion — puzzlement? distraction? — and eager dog suggest. Similarly, the passivity of the
which stands in marked contrast to the vain self-regard letter-writing officer is countered by his jutting elbows
of females in conventional mirror images. More typical and blunt-toed shoes. By contrast, the lady is genuinely
of Gerard’s mature oeuvre, the full-length figure in A still. Her restraint and self-control correspond to ideals
Young Woman at Her Toilet with a Maid (cat. 17) shows of feminine behavior that were articulated in contem-
off a bell-shaped dress formed of smooth, unbroken porary Petrarchan poetry, in courtesy books, and in
expanses of satin. Here as in later works, the dress — pedagogical literature — all important cultural and
which draws more attention to itself than to the wom- social contexts for Ter Borch’s art.17
10. G
erard ter Borch, An entirely different work, Woman Sealing a Letter they are placed could exist side by side in the same
The Letter (detail),
(cat. 33), has sometimes been hypothesized as the pen- house.) Such resemblances bestow a degree of equity
c. 1661, oil on canvas,
The Royal Collection, dant to the Officer Writing a Letter.18 Whether they are upon each gender. But Ter Borch has taken it further.
Her Majesty Queen or not, the juxtaposition of the two gives an insight The male’s room appears to be perfectly suited for mili-
Elizabeth ii
into Ter Borch’s ability to subvert the conventional tary business, yet the officer uses it to engage in private,
gender polarities on occasion. Both male and female female-associated, amorous behavior. If the lady’s activ-
are engaged in the activity of writing; both inhabit a ity seems more appropriate for her gender, the setting in
middle-class interior. (Indeed, the settings in which which she finds herself is less appropriate: rough pine
supports her table; the chimney valance falls lopsidedly.
An ordinary metal pail gleams in the diffuse light of the
space, a distant echo of the gleaming satin worn in Ter
Borch’s more elegant rooms.
Ter Borch’s Modernity

Seventeenth-century conceptions of modernity, insofar
as they were written down at all, were much less nuanced
and less polemical than the formulations of the nine-
teenth and twentieth centuries. From the seventeenth
century’s point of view, Ter Borch obediently followed
his father’s directive — not only in London but also
throughout his career. Except when painting portraits,
he devoted himself to producing modern figurative
groups. Further, he painted them with the technical
brilliance that Angel admired in contemporary work
and that Houbraken later explicitly described as “mod-
ern.” In De Lairesse’s sense as well, Ter Borch succeeded
in being modern, making the only sort of current art
that the critic could bring himself to praise: narratives
in “the elegant modern manner.”
But Ter Borch would not be the artist he is if his
modernity could be characterized so easily. As we have
seen, his art often blurs distinctions between low and
high, and confounds easy pairings such as public/male
and domestic/female.19 Never satisfied with the stock
subject or the stock character, he probed for contradic-
tions and invented alternatives. He kept his meanings
open ended, allowing us a range of responses appropri-
ate to the tensions, distractions, even dangers of the
fig. 10
28 Kettering
situations he constructed. He used a technically bril- monplace.20 But in one sense the response was correct.
liant means of pictorial expression not only to create These images did portray “modern life,” in that they
dazzling surface effects but also to explore the com- engaged themes fundamental to Ter Borch’s society:
plexities inherent in his chosen themes. As in all genre growing up, female and male conduct, duty and plea-
painting, his figures are meant to be anonymous, yet sure, work and leisure, civility and impropriety, clarity
they are rarely stereotyped, for he represented the mod- and subterfuge. In his “fictions,” Ter Borch succeeded in
els’ physiognomies — taken from his family circle — as painting the human condition — with all of its contin-
individual and unidealized. These psychologically com- gencies, mutabilities, and equivocations — in a manner
plex figures, by involving us in the narrative and invit- that has allowed viewers to see themselves. Although
ing us to relate to them personally, anticipate a twenty- Theophile Thoré misunderstood many aspects of Dutch
first-century way of viewing. art (even as he admired it), the critic did understand
The range of themes in Ter Borch’s oeuvre is at what he called the “truth” and “humanity” of the best
once narrow and wide. The familiar look of many seventeenth-century genre painting. Ter Borch’s work
scenes misled nineteenth- and twentieth-century view- counted among the best. In his highly personal way,
ers into considering them slices of life. Surely it was an Ter Borch painted true and human images of a world
anachronistic response to pictures that were carefully becoming modern.
shaped fictions or, better, transfigurations of the com-
30 Wallert
The Miracle of
Gerard ter Borch’s Satin
Arie Wallert
31 t h e m i r a c l e o f g e r a r d t e r b o r c h ’ s s a t i n
Ter Borch’s paintings are often admired Gerard’s father took the trouble to send the manikin all
for the manner in which the artist expressed the char- the way from the Dutch Republic, it also seems that he
acter of different materials. In his otherwise rather aus- deemed such a piece of equipment necessary for the
tere interiors, elegant people move about, dressed in young artist’s use.5 Draped on a manikin, the fab-
soft shimmering brocades and fluffy velvets, crisp lace ric — with all the complex folds that would occur in
and shiny metal, and, most notably, sparkling satin.1 “large, dynamic compositions” — could be studied and
When Ter Borch moved from his father’s studio carefully recorded in drawing. Then, on the basis of
in Zwolle to receive further training in Haarlem and meticulously worked out preliminary studies, the artist
Amsterdam, he would have met painters who special- could start painting.
ized in merry company scenes. Depicting amorous
groups of courteous gentleman and elegant ladies richly
clothed in gleaming silk had become increasingly fash- Satin
ionable in the first half of the seventeenth century. Satin draperies — with their lights and shadows, differ-
Pieter Codde and Willem Duyster were particularly ences in texture, shimmering colors, and shining sur-
good at it and Ter Borch must have learned the fine faces — force painters to use all of their abilities, espe-
tricks of painting satin from them.2 These tricks were cially when rendering direct and indirect light and half-
considered essential requirements for good painting. As tones. The fundamental problem an artist faces in ren-
Philips Angel wrote in 1642, “A painter worthy of praise dering light effects on a curved form is demonstrated
should be able to render this variety in the most pleas- by an illustration in Roger de Piles’ Cours de Peinture.6
ing way for all eyes with his brushwork, distinguishing De Piles’ example of a bunch of grapes is applicable for
between harsh, rough clothiness and smooth satiny any round volume in space (fig. 1, second drawing). The
evenness, in which the great enlightening Duyster, artist has only to draw a circle and give it a lighter tone
more than anyone else, is most excelled and celebrated.”3 on the area that catches the (day) light and a darker
Painting draped fabrics was particularly difficult, tone on the side that falls into shadow. The shadowed
especially when making portraits. These works were side of the grape that touches the floor is a little bit
not finished in a single session, and because drapery lighter because some of the light falling on the floor is
folds change with the movement of the body, artists reflected back to the grape’s underside. Thus, the
began to drape textiles over wooden manikins to sim- shadow is not completely extended to the grape’s outer
plify the artistic process of depicting a sitter’s clothes. edge. Samuel van Hoogstraten commented upon this
The importance of manikins for an artist is evident in phenomenon in his 1678 treatise on painting: “Reflec-
the letter that Ter Borch received in London from his tion is in fact the bouncing back of the light from all
father: “Dear child, I am sending you the manikin, but illuminated objects, but in the arts we only call reflec-
without a stand because it is too large and too heavy to tion that second illumination that falls in the shadows.”7
be put in the trunk. For a small amount of money you The spatial sensation evoked by this reflection
can have a stand made there. Use the manikin and do becomes even more convincing when the shadow that
not let it stand idle, as it has done here, but draw a lot: is projected onto the floor is also rendered. The pro-
large, dynamic compositions.”4 From this passage it jected shadow is usually darker in tone than the shadow
would appear that manikins or lay figures were on the object itself. This phenomenon is further empha-
unknown or unavailable in London. Moreover, since sized by the contrast between the deep shadow on the
32 Wallert
floor and the reflected light on the object’s shaded leather waistcoat against the red of the back of the chair 1. Illustration, from
Roger de Piles, Cours
edge. This play of light helps establish the relationship (fig. 2). Here the shadow on the man’s waistcoat is not
de Peinture par Principe
between the object and the surrounding space. Such fully extended, but becomes a bit lighter at its edge (Paris, 1708)
a play of light, which includes midtones and dark shad- because of the reflected light. This effect helps establish
ows as well as strong and soft highlights, applies not the man’s body as a three-dimensional object in space.
only for round balls, apples, cherries, and grapes, but Not only does the shaded jacket become lighter at its
also for other volumes, such as folds in a drapery. edge, but its color also changes. Subtle touches of red
Ter Borch’s attention to such effects is evident in appear on the jacket because the reflected light comes
the Gallant Conversation, commonly known as the from the red of the chair. As in De Piles’ illustrated
Paternal Admonition (cat. 27). Light falling from the grape, the shadow projected onto the chair is rendered
upper left projects a shadow from the man’s chamois more strongly than the shadow on the waistcoat itself.
Similar effects are seen in the standing lady’s satin
dress, but the rendering of satin is a particularly com-
plicated issue. Satin has a much more loosely bound
weave than tabby or twill. Generally the material is
woven with a weft thread that passes over one warp
thread, under four warp threads, and then over one
thread. This pattern produces a weave in which the face
shows virtually only the warp while the reverse is nearly
all wefts. As a result, the texture is particularly smooth,
especially if the wefts are silk. The warp threads are
also occasionally made of silk, but more often are in
cotton, both for strength and economy. Light falling on
vertical and horizontal threads, thus, reflects differ-
ently: when the fabric moves, light striking it at differ-
ent angles creates a shimmering effect.
Direct light falling on the shining surface of this
type of fabric responds differently than it does on other
fabrics. Light is not absorbed and softly scattered, but
(through the shiny surface) is directly and almost fully
reflected. One method for evoking this effect is to
increase the contrast between the strongest highlights
and the midtones. By varying the amount of contrast,
subtle differences in texture can be visualized, as, for
example, in Ter Borch’s A Young Woman at Her Toilet
with a Maid (cat. 17). The lady’s sleeve is made of a light,
woolly, nonshiny material. Light falling on this material
is scattered in all directions — an effect the artist indi-
cated by smoothly blending different paint mixtures
fig. 1
2. P aternal Admonition in a very flowing manner and minimizing differences are done with rather angular touches in a hard, pure,
(detail of cat. 27)
between the strongest highlights and the deepest shad- unmixed white.
ows. Her skirt, however, consists of a shiny satin. Here Ter Borch knew quite well how reflected light
the contrasts are more pronounced, with frosty white worked: the smoother the material, the more complete
highlights set against a darker midtone and even darker and stronger the reflections. The intensity of the reflec-
shadows. Even stronger in contrast are the ewer and tions on the Paternal Admonition varies from the soft
dish that the servant is holding. Ter Borch achieved touches of red in the man’s coat, through the ochre yel-
the effect of shiny metal by placing the brightest white, low mirrored silvery in the satin of the dress, to the
with almost complete elimination of the midtones, deep red of the tablecloth in which the silver bowl
against very deep shadows. The brightest highlights seems to sink (see fig. 2).
fig. 2
34 Wallert
One of the problems an artist faced in depicting tant Caspar Netscher in other compositions — the satin
draperies was rendering multiple volumes grouped dress appears in at least six pictures. Obviously, this
together in an irregular fashion. With draperies, shad- working method was a success. The drapery of the lady
ows are even projected onto the raised volumes of folds in the Glass of Lemonade in the Hermitage (cat. 39) is
behind them. The problem of modeling forms with the same as that in a painting of the same subject in
multiple volumes was considered in an eighteenth- a private collection (cat. 40). Some seven years later
century painter’s handbook by Dankers and Wiltschut: (about 1671), the very same design for the lady’s satin
“And if there are many objects grouped together, for gown was reused in a Portrait of a Lady that is now in a
instance fruits, then the shadows of the fruits that are French private collection.10 Also, the lady’s silk dress in
closest to the light must be so pale that there hardly the Cincinnati Art Museum’s Music Party (cat. 48) is
seem to be any shadows, and the highlights of the fruits repeated in The Music Lesson, now in Toledo (cat. 47).
that lie in the shadow must be so weak that they will Ter Borch’s oeuvre is full of partial or complete repeti-
not quench the shadow of the whole heap. But the tions of figures, either by the master himself or by stu-
whole pile must be considered as if it were one fruit. dio assistants.
And this takes place in figures, trees, flowers, and in all This practice had developed quite strongly by the
other things that can make groups or heaps.”8 Thus, beginning of the seventeenth century in the production
the artist, apart from modeling individual forms — of so-called merry company paintings. In the work-
whether a piece of fruit, a fold in a piece of drapery, or shops of Dirck Hals, Willem Duyster, and Pieter
a dress — must consider the complicated play of pro- Codde — where Ter Borch must have picked up many
jected shadows and mutual reflections in the entire of his working methods — compositional inventions and
ensemble (fig. 1, third drawing). individual motifs (preserved in studio drawings) were
continuously repeated, varied, combined, and copied.11
Because a lot of work went into solving problems of
Drawings and Underdrawings composition, form, and contrast in studio drawings,
Depicting the complex play of light in a material that it would not have been economical to use a successful
constantly changes form is an intricate and demanding drawing only once. Making a good drawing go a long
task for a painter. The issues are so complicated that way was sound workshop practice. Just like paints and
many scholars have assumed satin could only be brushes, study drawings were tools of the trade in every
painted by working directly after an actual model.9 That studio.12 The artist could paint after these drawings
painters employed such a method, however, does not himself or — in a more efficient division of labor — could
seem very likely. Rather, there was probably a step detail a studio assistant to transfer these drawings onto
between observation and painting — making drawn the painting’s support.
studies of textiles draped over a manikin and then The exact replication of the draperies on the vari-
copying them from paper to canvas. Such drawings ous versions of the Paternal Admonition, the Glass of
could be put to use on different occasions. The satin Lemonade, and the music paintings indicates that the
dress of the lady in the Amsterdam Paternal Admoni drawings must have been transferred to the gray
tion (cat. 27) is identical to the one in a similar Paternal ground of the canvas by a mechanical procedure.13
Admonition in Berlin (cat. 27, fig. 1). The studio drawing Such a transfer would have been fairly simple. The
of the dress was also used by Ter Borch and his assis- drawing was probably laid on the canvas with a spe-
cially prepared transfer paper inserted, pigment side before being worked up with a translucent glaze of red
down, between the two. With a pointed, but not overly lake. This combination would give a deep dark tone to
sharp tool, the artist (or one of his assistants) traced the the shadows. In brighter areas the blues could be fin-
contours of the design, thereby pressing the pigment ished off with a very thin layer of the beautiful but
powder from the transfer sheet onto the canvas. This extremely expensive ultramarine.17 The seventeenth-
method was already described by Giorgio Vasari in 1550, century physician Theodore de Mayerne describes this
by Borghini in 1584, and featured in the so-called Vol- process for painting reds: “First, the dead-colours
pato manuscript: “A leaf of paper is covered with dry should be painted, that is, a first layer of vermilion and
white lead or gesso, which, being placed between the red lake. Next, let it dry. Then it should be glazed with
tracing paper (design) and the canvas, where it is oiled, a good red lake. Here and there, this is touched-up a bit
the outlines of these figures are pressed with a needle or stronger with the lake; and stronger still with ivory
a bone, and the coloured paper, which is placed between black — which to promote drying has been mixed with a
the two, leaves impressed all those marks which you touch of copper green. Then, the highlights of the drap-
have indented with the needle.”14 The first to describe ery are painted with an orangey mixture of vermilion
this method in the northern countries was Karel van and very good red lead, or a pale red mixture of vermil-
Mander in 1604.15 Thus, the practice of transferring ion and lead white.”18 He also makes prescriptions for
patterns to make multiple copies of a design was clearly plain black textiles, yellow silk, or white, or other tex-
fairly common.16 tures, such as a black fluffy velvet with its short densely
Coating the back of the design itself with pigment piled surface.
and directly transferring its contours onto the canvas In Curiosity (cat. 35) Ter Borch refined this approach
could simplify this procedure even further. Quite a few and carried it a bit further. Instead of creating clear,
drawings by Ter Borch are still extant, although not one systematic, and fairly distinctive divisions between
of them depicts a lady in satin. This occurrence is not as midtones, shadows, and highlights, Ter Borch put on
strange as it may seem. Of course the best examples his highlights of lead white and shadows of red lake
were reproduced more than any others. And there are pigment in extremely thin layers of paint, applied in a
limitations to the number of times that a drawing can very fine network of overlapping touches. Ter Borch’s
be traced. The transfer process, over time, would so paints are spread so thinly that almost imperceptible
damage the drawing that it would no longer be useful transitions are created. The thin gradations of scumbles
or aesthetically pleasing. Such drawings were probably of lead white over a similarly thinly applied pink dead
thrown away. color give his highlights a shimmering liveliness. In this
passage he cleverly used the dead color to play with the
effects of light falling on the smooth textile, while he
Dead Colors also used the highlight to emphasize the volume of the
In standard seventeenth-century painting practice, body under that textile.
dead coloring was the first paint layer that defined the
image. Over the gray ground layer on the canvas, indi-
vidual forms were painted in even midtones with rela- Paints and Layers
tively cheap materials. For instance, a blue area could What then, were the paints or paint mixtures that Ter
first be blocked out with the cheap pigment smalt Borch had to use in order to follow such procedures?
36 Wallert
Apart from his father’s remark that his paints should be of each [pigment], according to the demands of nature. 3. Paternal Admonition
(cat. 27), cross section
“most beautiful and flowing while drying,” no documen- Such would also be good for the reflections if more
of the silvery gray in
tary evidence exists about Ter Borch’s painting tech- white and light ochre are added.”19 the satin dress
nique. Some seventeenth-century texts, however, pro- For the painting of white satin Beurs prescribes top: reflected light,
magnification 360 x
vide useful information. Ter Borch’s native townsman the same mixtures as for snow, but stresses that they
bottom: UV
and colleague Willem Beurs describes in his handbook should be painted with more shine: “the mixture that is
fluorescence
the various mixtures necessary to render all sorts of required to paint white satin closely resembles the mix- 1. traces of the
materials, from peaches, bugs, copper, and silver, to ture used to paint snow, but it has slightly more sheen, ochre-colored quartz
ground, 2. dead color
glass, red and yellow flowers, and snow. For these so that its white must be found in scallop-white. And it of lead white, red
objects he indicates the mixtures for the dead coloring must be painted purely and particularly warm in the lake, lamp black,
3. lead white and
for the shadows and for the “day,” that is, the side of the sunlight. To render the tenderness of the side [of the vine black, 4. lead
object that catches the (day) light. Sometimes he also satin drapery] that catches the light with the black and white, vine black,
and yellow ochre,
gives advice for reflections of the object. On the paint- white, some ultramarine or smalt is used. The shadow 5. highlight in lead
ing of the white of snow he relates that “to paint its must be glowing and mixed with black and slightly white and some lamp
black, 6. highlight of
proper day, white and black are mixed as required, and lighter ochre than you would use to paint snow. Make pure lead white
if it would appear too blue, some red lake should be the reflection a bit lighter than the shadow with some
mixed in. The shadow demands some carbon black and white, black, light ochre, and a little bit of vermilion.”20
a bit of white and light ochre mixed in a gradient scale Technical examination of the Paternal Admonition
(cat. 27) shows that Ter Borch used these pigments in
the prescribed combinations and layers. He applied the
same systematic, additive method of working from a
flat dead-colored midtone, using dark tones for the
shadows and bright lead white accents for the high-
lights on the tops of the folds. He used a slight touch of
ochre in the gray of the shadows, some white with just a
snippet of black and a trace of ultramarine for the mid-
tones, and pure white for the highlights. He created the
highlights with a fine network of tiny strokes, licks, and
dabs. These applications of mixtures with lead white
are so thin that the image in an x-radiograph is pale and
ghostly.21 The paint cross sections also show that the
6 buildup of the satin was done in just a few different lay-
5 3 4
ers (fig. 3). The shadows consist of lead white mixed to
a cool gray with very fine charcoal black. To make this
2 gray slightly warmer (glowing) in tone, he mixed an
ever-so-small occasional grain of red lake. In accor-
1 dance with Beurs’ description, the mixture contains a
fair amount of extremely fine light ochre. This ochre is
so fine that even under high magnification individual
fig. 3
4. Paternal Admonition particles can hardly be recognized. Highlights on top de Lairesse, who, in his early eighteenth-century trea-
of this mixture are done in pure “scallop-white.”22 tise on painting, encouraged artists to paint not “like
of the yellowish reflec
tion in the satin dress The buildup of the rather yellowish paint for the Rembrandt or Lievens so that the paint would run
top: reflected light, satin reflecting the wooden floor consists of two layers down the piece like shit, but smooth and mellow so that
magnification 360 x
(fig. 4). The top layer contains a mixture of lead white, the objects seem round and in relief only through arti-
bottom: UV
charcoal black, and the very fine ochre. This layer cov- fice and not through smudging.” Apparently the
fluorescence
1. quartz ground with ers a rather darker mixture containing black and white, approach recommended by the elder Ter Borch was
ochre, 2. dead color of but no ochre. The ground itself consists of only a sin- something of an innovation, for De Lairesse wrote
lead white, lamp black,
umber, 3. top layer of gle layer: a rather coarse and gritty ochre-colored about “clever characters who try to get some recogni-
very fine ochre, umber, quartz sand.23 tion by novelties. Recently several of these types were
and lead white
seen: to mention only two, Rembrandt and Lievens.”
5. Woman at a Mirror According to De Lairesse, only painters with very spe-
(cat. 16), x-radiograph
showing the thin, A Loose Manner cial abilities could be expected to deliver appreciable
subtle network of As proficient as he was in this well-established method, results with this direct method. It took “someone with a
lead white
Ter Borch was also apparently trained to paint in a steady hand and a quick brush to complete his concept
6.Woman at a Mirror rather different manner. This newer method is described in one go, which otherwise could not be done without
by Gerard ter Borch the Elder in his 1635 letter to his dead coloring it first.”26 In such an approach the forms
of the silvery gray in
the satin dress son, whom he instructs to paint “modern compositions, were not precisely traced from a previously prepared
top: reflected light, as you surely can, by rummaging about and working studio drawing, then meticulously painted in with a
magnification 360 x
them up in one go, because that goes most quickly and
bottom: UV
[the paint] stays most beautiful and flowing while dry-
fluorescence
1. cells of oak panel, ing.”24 The old-fashioned method involved creating
2. chalk ground, paintings in several separate steps, beginning with
3. monochrome sketch
in umber, ochre, and drawings in which problems of anatomy, contrast, and
lead white, 4 – 7. paint composition had already been solved. The so-called
layers in different
shades of gray: lead “modern” method seemingly encouraged painters to
white, umber, ochre, solve all artistic problems simultaneously and directly
vine black, red lake
on the panel without preparative drawings.
In the newer approach, shapes and forms were
loosely defined with sketchy, monochromatic brush-
work. Color was gradually brought into the work in a
much less compartmentalized manner than that seen 3
in the Paternal Admonition (cat. 27). This efficient 2
painting technique allowed the artist to rapidly com-
plete his composition over under-modeling that had 1
been swiftly applied in thin browns and grays.25
This method did not enjoy a particularly high sta-
tus, hence the expressions “rummaging” in the Ter
Borch letter and “smudging” in the remark by Gerard
fig. 4
38 Wallert
dead color. Rather, the design was roughly drawn in the foreground are fully worked out, her left sleeve is
brownish paint directly on the panel or canvas. only very thinly covered with paint so that the umber
Ter Borch’s Woman at a Mirror (cat. 16) is a paint- underdrawing shimmers through.28 Observation of this
ing that seems to have been executed in this direct painting with the stereomicroscope has shown that the
manner.27 The painting is done rather loosely, with highlights on the sleeves were not made by adding
many more brushstrokes, much more freely applied touches of lead white. Rather, in this case Ter Borch
than those seen in versions of the Paternal Admonition, appears to have used a subtractive manner of painting.
Glass of Lemonade, or music paintings. Although the He began this process by using a fine brush to paint,
pale pink of the lady’s neck and face in the mirror and in a subtle network of many thin licks and sweeps, a
the sparkling white of her right sleeve or the bodice on smooth and even layer of whites and pale grays as the
basis of the satin (figs. 5 and 6). He then scumbled black
particles on so thinly that the white underneath still
shimmers through, applying them in such a manner
that individual touches cannot be distinguished. By
varying the thickness of the scumbled layer, Ter Borch
76
54
1
3 2
fig. 5 fig. 6
7. Woman at a Mirror could model the form, only occasionally applying a bit hidden in the dark. This approach can also be found in
(cat. 16), detail of
of brownish paint to indicate the darkest areas of the the works of Caspar Netscher, Ter Borch’s student in
the satin dress
(magnification 25 x) woman’s dress.29 Deventer from about 1654 to 1659, as well as in paint-
Then, the actual trick was played. With a fine piece ings by Eglon van der Neer and Adriaen van der Werff.
of cloth, a thin bristle, or a clean brush, he selectively Following Ter Borch, these artists also made the paint-
wiped off the gray film, thereby revealing the bright ing of satin their particular field of interest. Indeed, Van
white of the paint underneath (fig. 7). He used this sub- der Neer is described in Van der Werff’s autobiography
tractive technique so effectively that it is very nearly as choosing “the modern manner” of Ter Borch “to
imperceptible. Only on the most strongly protruding paint satin skirts and other dresses.”30 But if these art-
areas (those closest to the viewer) — a bit of the skirt, ists were such specialists in depicting satins, why are
the top of her right sleeve, her right shoulder — can Ter Borch’s satins so much more convincing than those
these “highlights-by-wiping-off” be found. On the rest painted by these very able painters?
of the dress and, in particular, on her left sleeve, varia- If it were enough to simply know the right tricks —
tions in tone occur only through the modulation of the whether in creating contrasts or in using the correct
thin gray film. pigment combinations — then the satins painted by
Ter Borch, Van der Neer, and Frans van Mieris would
be appreciated equally. Clearly, more is needed to create
Material Characteristics a convincing depiction of satin drapery. The difference
Routinely connecting the highlights of satin was a is in the acuity of observation. Leonardo da Vinci had
common approach among Dutch artists. The strongest noted that “Draperies should be drawn from the actual
highlights of the satin are always connected as lines on object; that is, if you wish to represent a woollen drap-
the tops of the folds while the depths of the pleats are ery, make the folds accordingly; and if it is silk or fine
cloth, or coarse material such as peasants wear, or linen,
or veiling, diversify the folds of each kind of material.”31
Also in Ter Borch’s own day the need to observe the
characteristic properties of different textile materials
was recognized. Philips Angel, in fact, listed as one of
the essential requirements of a painter the ability to
“make a proper distinction between silk, velvet, wool
and linen stuffs, for very rarely does one see velvet attire
that appears to have the sheen of velvet, nor do they
observe the creases and folds, nor take note of the dif-
ference between woollen and linen stuffs, nor the gloss
that is found more in satin than in silk from Tours, and
they also miss the thinness that should be imitated in
fine linen and thin crepe.”32
The satin dress of the standing lady in Ter Borch’s
Paternal Admonition attests to his keen eye. Occasion-
ally, to make satin a bit more sturdy, the textile was
fig. 7
40 Wallert
starched and ironed. When such a starched satin the relationship between the spectator’s viewpoint and
garment hangs down onto the floor, the stiff textile the light source. Since the angle of incidence equals the
is pushed back up by that floor. Where these two angle of reflection, reflected light coming from a shiny
forces — the gravity of the hanging textile and the plane of satin occurs at the same angle as the incident
upward force of the stiff material — meet, the fold is light falling on the drapery. Ter Borch’s awareness of
deformed. Because of this relative stiffness, large angu- this optical phenomenon contributes tremendously to
lar planes are formed rather than small round creases. the sense of realism he created in his works. He cor-
Light is reflected from these large planes instead of rectly determined the proper angles of reflections, thus
from the small pleats and crimps. While many of these bringing his viewers into a clear and direct spatial rela-
mirrorlike planes reflect the color of the material, oth- tionship with the objects depicted. Indeed, his skill can
ers, depending on the angle of inclination, reflect the make viewers forget that the image he created is just
color of the floor. made of paint — a hallmark of a brilliant artist.
The character of the reflected light created by the
small dents and depressions in the fabric is affected by
42
Catalogue
AKW Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.
AMK Alison McNeil Kettering
MEW Marjorie E. Wieseman
43
1 Horse and Rider
1633/1634, oil on canvas, 51.5 × 41 (20 @ × 16 ¡)

On loan from a Private collection, Courtesy of the
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford
1. Gerard ter Borch, From his earliest moments as an artist, Ter Borch was ern province of the Netherlands? Was it a work of his
Man on Horseback,
fascinated by the interactions of horse and rider (see imagination, perhaps conceived in hopes that a patron
c. 1634, oil on panel,
Museum of Fine Arts, Wheelock essay, figs. 3, 4). In numerous drawings from could be found amongst the garrisons located there to
Boston, Juliana Cheney his formative years in Zwolle, he turned to this subject, prevent Spanish intrusions into Dutch lands? Ques-
Edwards Collection
depicting not only horsemen mounted on their steeds, tions abound, with very few answers to be found.
but also cavaliers adjusting their saddles and sleigh This painting of a solitary rider seen from behind
drivers urging on their horses. In most of these studies, has to be considered in the context of two other compa-
including one memorable image in which a mounted rable images by Ter Borch — close variations that must
soldier is shown urinating as the horse calmly waits indicate that the composition was a success and had
for him to finish, the figures are shown from the rear, immediate appeal for collectors (fig. 1).2 The version in
anonymous and undistinguished.1 Still, while such the exhibition is the most mature of these works, as it
studies help provide a context for Horse and Rider, they exhibits a sense of volume and movement absent from
do little to prepare the viewer for the striking power of the others. The apparently rapid evolution in Ter
this exceptional painting. Borch’s stylistic maturity was one reason that Gud-
Ter Borch presents no heroic image of a cavalry- laugsson concluded that this work must date at the
man on a powerful steed in the midst of battle, but beginning of Ter Borch’s career, probably when he was
rather that of a slightly weary figure hunched over his
powerful horse as it trudges across an undefined land-
scape. It is an image that immediately conjures up the
isolation and long, lonely hours of a soldier’s life away
from the camaraderie of the barracks. The solemnity of
the image seems immense, as the weight of the horse
and rider bear down on the viewer, whom Ter Borch
has placed at a low vantage point. Except for the bright
yellow feather in the soldier’s tan felt hat, the colors are
somber — primarily the browns of the horse, the ochres
of the soldier’s boots, and the bluish-black of his metal
harness. The sky against which horse and rider are so
starkly silhouetted is cloudy, without a hint of sun.
It is difficult to fathom what experience allowed
Ter Borch to conceive this image. This work has no real
precedent in Dutch art, except for Ter Borch’s own
youthful drawings. No known painting by Willem
Duyster, whom Ter Borch may have encountered in
Amsterdam in the early 1630s, or by Pieter Molijn, with
whom he studied in Haarlem in 1634, remotely resem-
bles the mood of this remarkable image. Was it a scene
that he had witnessed near Zwolle in Overijssel, per-
haps a sentry patrolling the open landscape in this east-
fig. 1
44
in Haarlem in 1634.3 Nevertheless, the painting might model their forms. Such sensitivities, however, could
even be dated slightly earlier, that is, before Ter Borch well have been developed in the workshop of an artist
went to study with Pieter Molijn. An earlier date seems such as Duyster or Pieter Codde, who, among their
probable since Ter Borch’s drawings of solitary riders other abilities, excelled at painting reflected light on
date from the early 1630s and not from 1634, when he metallic surfaces.4
was in Haarlem. Moreover, given that Molijn was a spe- Gudlaugsson postulated that Ter Borch may have
cialist in landscape, it seems unusual that Ter Borch based his image on a manikin rather than a live model,
would have created such a superficial landscape setting a hypothesis that seems probable given his father’s rec-
for this work had he already had the benefit of the mas- ommendations urging him to use such artistic aids
ter’s training. when conceiving his paintings.5 The use of such mani-
If Ter Borch did create this work prior to his kins may help explain not only how Ter Borch was able
apprenticeship in Haarlem, he clearly had already to create three such similar images, but also why he had
achieved a high level of artistic sensitivity as a result a predilection for depicting figures from the rear. These
of his training with his father and his experiences in small-scale wooden models were extremely useful for
Amsterdam. It is unlikely that his father taught him to conveying poses and body language but did not aid the
create such a striking silhouette of horse and rider or to artist in recording facial expressions. A K W
employ broad planes of color such as those he used to
46
2 The Consultation
1635, oil on panel, 34.5 × 45.7 (13 ∞ × 18)

Staatliche Museen zu Berlin — Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
Gemäldegalerie
As he holds the glass vial to the light, the old bearded humor and satire. Jan Steen, for example, generally
doctor stares intently at the color and relative clarity of depicted the doctor as a humorous figure making his
the urine it contains. With a proper diagnosis through (rather suspect) diagnosis in the home of a melancholic,
uroscopy, a trained physician was thought to be able to lovesick young woman. Ter Borch depicted the doctor
determine the presence of blood, sugar, or acid, infor- is his study, making his diagnosis without the presence
mation that could lead to an assessment of the malady of the patient, whose urine has been brought in an
afflicting the patient. If the urine were thin and clear, earthenware chamber pot by the woman’s maidservant.
it was generally believed to indicate the beginnings of How Ter Borch came to paint this subject, which
a condition known since antiquity as furor uterinus; if was not commonly depicted in the first three decades of
it were thick and reddish, it indicated a more advanced the seventeenth century, and how he arrived at his spe-
condition of the same ailment. Furor uterinus was seen cific interpretation of the scene are little understood.
as a root cause for most female ailments, including list- The earliest known painting signed and dated by the
lessness, and was a sure indication of lovesickness. Not artist, The Consultation must have been painted soon
all seventeenth-century consultants, however, were after Ter Borch became a master in the Haarlem Saint
university trained, and the profession was rife with Luke’s Guild.2 Gudlaugsson has even suggested that it
frauds and charlatans who preyed upon the gullibility was the “masterwork” Ter Borch presented to the guild
of the lovelorn.1 when he enrolled. This argument is partly premised on
Ter Borch does not make it entirely clear whether the idea that Ter Borch valued the work highly enough
the consultant in this painting is a serious doctor or a to retain it in his own possession, at least until 1659,
fraud. Although his gaze is steady, his beard manicured, when his student Caspar Netscher painted a free adap-
and he wears the robes of a philosopher or scholar, the tation of it.3
disarray of his study does not bode well for the accuracy Nevertheless, the painting’s serious demeanor
of his diagnosis. The skull, the hourglass, the empty seems to owe little to artistic traditions in Haarlem,
lantern, and the mirror are all elements associated with where such painters as Frans Hals, Jan Miense Molen-
transience, a thematic undertone reinforced by the aer (1609/1610–1669), and Judith Leyster (1609–1660)
blossoms and broken pot on the floor, and even by the were creating relatively exuberant images of daily life.
books and pamphlets strewn on the table. This dim, Similarly, the careful manner in which Ter Borch exe-
untidy interior, filled with reminders of the vanity of cuted the consultant’s face, with its intense gaze, and
life, is not an environment that suggests intellectual the attention he paid to the still-life objects, including
clarity and foresight. Nevertheless, the artist, for his the angled reflection in the mirror, seem more consis-
part, seems to convey a certain sense of sympathy for tent with stylistic qualities found in paintings produced
the doctor and the woman awaiting his diagnosis. While in Antwerp in the mid-1630s by artists such as David
perhaps misguided, they are earnest in their efforts to Teniers II and Jan Davidsz de Heem (1606 – 1683/1684).4
search for the mysteries of the human condition. Indeed, one of Teniers’ doctor scenes even depicts the
A doctor examining a glass urine vial was a favorite consultant identically posed as he analyzes urine in a
theme for Dutch and Flemish artists, but Ter Borch’s glass vial (fig. 1).
image is like none other. Most artists, particularly those
working after midcentury, found the subject ripe for
47
Just how Ter Borch would have seen such works is 1. David Teniers II,
Le Medecin de Village
not known. No documents indicate that the artist vis-
(The Village Doctor),
ited Antwerp prior to his trip to England in the summer c. 1635, Musées Royaux
of 1635. And the fact that Ter Borch’s father in his letter des Beaux-Arts de
Belgique, Brussels
of July 1635 mentions visits to Amsterdam and Haarlem,
but not to Antwerp, would seem to indicate that no visit
to that artistic center occurred before his trip to Lon-
don.5 The supposition has always been made that Ter
Borch was meant to make an extended stay in London,
where his uncle Robert van Voerst was an engraver
(who died from the plague in October 1636). For what-
ever reason, the London visit seems to have been of
short duration, for he was back in Zwolle by April 1636.
It is entirely possible that during Ter Borch’s return trip
he stopped in Antwerp to visit another uncle, Aert de
Bonte.6 During such a stay he could have met Teniers
fig. 1 and De Heem and seen their paintings. Ter Borch prob-
ably painted The Consultation at the very end of 1635,
perhaps in Zwolle, which might account for the fact
that Caspar Netscher knew of the painting in 1659.
AKW
49
3 Procession with Flagellants
c. 1636/1640, oil on panel, 41.5 × 71.5 (16 & × 28 ¡)

Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam
1. Pieter van Laer, This dark and brooding painting depicts a nocturnal bers of the brotherhood believed that by flagellating
The Flagellants, c. 1635,
procession of flagellants, whose blood-streaked backs themselves publicly they purged themselves and man-
oil on canvas, Alte
Pinakothek, Munich and eerie white costumes are illuminated by torch kind from grievous sin — their penance thereby preserv-
bearers lining their path. The processors lead a group ing the whole world from perishing. Although Catholic
of six dark-cloaked and hooded men who carry aloft a authorities eventually condemned the movement, it
decorated statue of the Virgin Mary. Standing behind continued to exist throughout the seventeenth century,
the sculpture at the opening of an enormous arched its appeal ever enhanced by plagues, reactions to tyran-
portico is a group of singers, whose musical score is nical rulers, or the ardent preaching of a zealous priest.3
illuminated by yet more torches. This fascinating painting, unique in Ter Borch’s
Ter Borch’s haunting depiction of this night pro- oeuvre, has raised many questions about where and
cession of flagellants is remarkably similar to a scene in when the artist encountered such a procession, and
Rome witnessed by the English diarist John Evelyn on what inspired him to paint this unusual scene. Willem
Good Friday, 1645. Evelyn, awestruck by the experience, von Bode, who was the first art historian to write about
described it in the following compelling terms: “and the the painting, concluded that Ter Borch must have
Night a procession of severall people that most lamen- painted it in Spain, in large part because the painting
tably whipped themselves till all the blood staind their reminded Bode of the Spanish Inquisition.4 Other
clothes, for some had shirts, others upon the beare back, scholars have believed that Ter Borch, like John Evelyn,
with visors and masks on their faces, at every 3 or 4 stepps witnessed such a procession in Rome.5 Indeed, as Gud-
dashing the knotted and raveled whip-cord over their laugsson has noted, the few other contemporary depic-
shoulders, as hard as they could lay it on, whilst some of tions of flagellants all seem to have been executed in
the religious Orders and fraternities sung in a dismal Italy, including one attributed to Pieter van Laer, a
tone, the lights, and Crosses going before, which shewd Haarlem artist living in Rome between 1625 and 1639
very horrible, and indeede a heathenish pomp.”1 Ter (fig. 1).6
Borch conveyed in paint a comparable sense of wonder,
fascination, and horror at the spectacle before him,
casting a pool of strong light on the blood-streaked
flagellants. As they march along before the venerated
statue of the Virgin, their moans and wails — and the
muffled sounds of the chorus — strike an eerie chord
even today. The smell of the burning torches, whose
smoke blends into the dark sky above, seems equally
present, adding to the uneasy sense that these cele-
brants belong to a different world and a different men-
tality, both fascinating and frightening to behold.
Flagellants were members of a fanatical and hereti-
cal sect often called the Brotherhood of the Cross. This
sect had its origins in northern Italy in the thirteenth
century, but by the fifteenth century, it had spread to
Spain, France, Germany, and the Netherlands.2 Mem-
fig. 1
50
2. F rancisco de Goya, This painting, thus, is a crucial document in the
Procession of Flagellants,
discussions about Ter Borch’s travels. Largely on the
1815 – 1819, oil on
panel, The Museum basis of Houbraken’s account, it has been generally
of the Royal Academy believed that Ter Borch visited Italy in the latter half of
of Fine Arts of San
Fernando the 1630s, presumably Rome, where he could well have
met Pieter van Laer and other members of the artist
community of Bentvueghels, which mostly comprised
Dutch and Flemish artists.7 Van Laer, nicknamed Bam-
boccio, had an enormous impact on his fellow painters
in his unidealized depictions of Roman street life. His
portrayal of flagellants could well have inspired Ter
Borch to create his remarkable scene, since in both
instances the artists placed relatively small-scale figures
in a broader spatial environment.
fig. 2
Whether or not the example of Van Laer provides a
strong enough link to conclude that Ter Borch actually
visited Rome, however, is a matter of some debate. Although the immediate experience that generated
Despite their similarities, the two paintings are remark- this image may have occurred in Italy or Spain, Ter
ably different in mood and atmosphere. Ter Borch’s Borch probably painted the work after he returned to
painting conveys an overriding sense of movement that the Netherlands. As Lammertse has noted, Ter Borch
is not to be seen in Van Laer’s painting — movement of used an oak panel, a support more likely to be found in
the sort that Gerard the Elder encouraged his son to the Netherlands than in Italy or Spain.9 The women’s
incorporate in his works.8 The artist’s compelling por- costumes, moreover, are Dutch in character. Lam
trayal of an artificially lit night scene is also more mertse rightly surmises that Ter Borch may have
directly related to his training with Pieter Molijn than painted this work for a Spanish patron, and that the
to the influence of Pieter van Laer, and is comparable painting was eventually sent or taken to Spain. Ter
to drawings Ter Borch made during the late 1630s (see Borch’s painting was probably known to Francisco de
Wheelock essay, fig. 5). Goya, who in the early nineteenth century painted a
Other than Houbraken’s reference to Ter Borch’s remarkably similar view of flagellants processing before
visit to Italy, no other document confirms that the artist a sculpture of the Virgin (fig. 2). As Lammertse notes,
actually made such a trip. Flagellants were also to be by then public self-flagellation had been prohibited for
seen in Spain, and supporting evidence seems to con- more than forty years, a further indicaton that Ter
firm that Ter Borch did make a trip there, probably in Borch’s painting may have served as a model for the
the mid-1630s. Indeed, the vague architectural forms of Spanish master.10 A K W
the church portal behind the chorus seem more Span-
ish in character than Italian.
52
4 Portrait of a Man
c. 1639/1640, oil on copper, 48.6 × 35.7 (19 ¡ × 14 %)

Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Gift of George T. Cameron
The distinguished middle-aged subject of this portrait ment of either success or defiance, connoting authority, 1. Diego Velázquez, Pablo
de Valladolid, c. 1633,
is plainly dressed in a high-waisted black doublet and self-possession, and control. In the seventeenth-century
oil on canvas, Museo
narrow breeches tied below the knees. He wears a hat Netherlands it is most often encountered in portraits Nacional del Prado,
with a tall crown pulled firmly over his head and a knee- of the powerful regent class.1 In Ter Borch’s portrait, Madrid
length cloak caught up at his left side. Light gray gloves the pose eloquently expresses the subject’s proud self-
dangle loosely from his right hand. A sheer flat collar confidence, an impression further strengthened by the
and cuffs and snowy white boot tops (canons), all direct eye contact he makes with the viewer.
trimmed with deeply lobed bobbin lace, alleviate the Gudlaugsson saw the influence of portraits by
sober black of his costume. Strong light flooding from Diego Velázquez in this painting, specifically compar-
the left side of the composition accentuates the man’s ing the man’s confident bearing and wide stance to the
slightly sagging features and casts vague shadows upon Spanish painter’s Pablo de Valladolid (fig. 1). Ter Borch
the ground at his feet. By placing his subject in stark may well have seen portraits by Velázquez during his
isolation against an ambiguous light-colored back- brief stay in Madrid in 1639, but it is a matter of some
ground, Ter Borch created a remarkably powerful and conjecture whether he was directly influenced by them.2
expressive likeness. Admittedly Velázquez’ portrait also deliberately avoids
The man’s left hand is propped on his hip in a clas- creating an illusion of spatial depth by omitting any
sic gesture of self-assertion and social assurance. The defined juncture between wall and floor. But Vallado
boldly thrusting elbow had been a common posture in lid’s pose is aggressively theatrical, compared to the
male (military) portraits since the Renaissance: a state- more restrained, natural confidence projected by Ter
Borch’s subject. It is also essential to keep in mind that
the visual impact of Velázquez’ monumental, nearly life-
sized painting is quite different from the discreet
charm of Ter Borch’s small copper panel.
The immediate inspiration for Portrait of a Man,
as well as Ter Borch’s other early full-length portraits
(compare cats. 5, 6), is more likely to have been the
small, finely painted full-length likenesses produced
during the 1620s and 1630s by Amsterdam artists such
as Thomas de Keyser, Simon Kick, Pieter Codde, and
Willem Duyster, and especially by the Haarlem painter
Hendrik Gerritsz Pot.3 As Ter Borch was living in Haar-
lem by 1634 and joined the guild there in 1635, the year
in which Pot was dean, he could hardly have been
unaware of the older artist’s work. Pot’s Charles I,
fig. 1
53
2. H
endrik Gerritsz Pot, painted in England in 1632,4 and Jacob van der Merckt
Jacob van der Merckt,
(fig. 2) both show the figure confidently posed with
c. 1633–1635, present
location unknown hand on hip and similarly silhouetted against an
unadorned light-colored background. The more cir-
cumspect placement of the subject’s feet and the gen-
teel furnishings added to the room dilute the visual
impact of these portraits, however, and underscore the
dramatic achievement of Ter Borch’s deceptively simple
composition. M E W
fig. 2
54
5 Portrait of a Man
c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #)

Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond,
The Adolph D. and Wilkins C. Williams Fund
1. Gerard ter Borch, Soberly clad in a black doublet, cloak, and breeches, this
Portrait of a Man Aged
dapper Dutch gentleman is presented as a slim and
Forty-Two, 1652, oil
on copper, Museo compact ovoid form, balanced on elegantly turned-out
Thyssen-Bornemisza, feet and isolated before a neutral backdrop. The setting
Madrid
is minimally defined by just a line softly marking the
juncture between floor and wall. The man’s slightly
cocked head gives a rakish tilt to his hat and draws
attention to his bemused expression. His right arm
appears to be tucked behind his back; emerging from
the voluminous folds of his cloak, his gloved left hand
dangles the vacant mate. A crisp white collar and boot
tops, trimmed with deeply lobed bobbin lace, accentu-
ate the painting’s warm neutral palette.
The meticulously detailed description of physiog- fig. 1
nomy and costume that characterizes this portrait and
its pendant (cat. 6) is enhanced by the smooth, non- paintings rendered in meticulous detail, Ter Borch
absorbent surface of the copper support. Ter Borch turned to canvas or wood panel for the elegant and
painted just over forty works on copper; more than finely wrought genre paintings of his mature career,
half of these (about twenty-four) were done during the consciously incorporating into his design the subtle
1640s, although he continued to utilize copper supports shimmer created by the surface irregularities inherent
sporadically throughout his career.1 All but two of Ter in these supports.3
Borch’s paintings on copper are portraits (see cat. 13), Ter Borch seems to have portrayed this unidenti-
and the majority of these are bust- or half-length cabi- fied subject a second time, in the Portrait of a Man
net miniatures (see cats. 8–12). Indeed, the Richmond Aged Forty-Two (fig. 1). The latter likeness, seen at bust-
portraits (and the Portrait of a Man in San Francisco, length within an oval field, depicts a man with the same
cat. 4) are unusual in that they are particularly large, long straight nose, cleft chin, and thin lank hair falling
full-length likenesses on copper. The formal aspect of over his forehead; an increased heaviness around the
these full-length likenesses is probably indebted to the jawline signals the passage of a dozen years. Gudlaugs-
work of Hendrik Gerritsz Pot and others (see cat. 4), but son proposed that the Thyssen pendants were painted
the direct inspiration for Ter Borch’s use of copper as a in about 1640 and altered in 1652 by the artist himself
support has not yet been identified. While the use of to modernize the subjects’ garments,4 but Gaskell has
copper panels was widespread in both the Northern correctly pointed out that these perceived alterations
and Southern Netherlands during the sixteenth and are in fact traces of the artist’s painting technique that
first half of the seventeenth centuries,2 in portraits it have become more evident over time.5 If the two paint-
seems to have been a more common choice for formats ings do depict the same man, as appears likely, an age of
linked to the established traditions of the portrait min- approximately thirty would seem appropriate for the
iature (for example, bust- or half-length). Thus, its use subject of the Richmond portrait. M E W
here may have been a factor of the specific commission.
Although copper panels would seem ideally suited to
56
6 Portrait of a Woman
c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #)

Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond,
The Adolph D. and Wilkins C. Williams Fund
1. Gerard ter Borch, Jan The subject of this full-length portrait is modestly but
Bardoel, c. 1644–1645,
elegantly attired in a black bodice, stomacher, and skirt.
oil on panel, present
location unknown Her upper skirt (called a schort or wacht)1 is hoisted
2. Gerard ter Borch, to knee length, revealing a matching underskirt. She
Maria Wybouts, wears an extraordinarily wide millstone ruff; by the
c. 1644–1645, oil on
panel, present loca time this portrait was painted, in about 1640, the ruff
tion unknown had very nearly passed from fashion and this thin, disk-
3. G
erard ter Borch, Por- like profile was its final, mannered manifestation. The
trait of a Woman Aged woman’s cap and cuffs are made of thin cambric or fine
Thirty, dated 165[2],
oil on copper, Museo linen, edged with deeply lobed lace, and she holds a fig. 1 fig. 2 fig. 3
Thyssen-Bornemisza, light gray glove in her gloved right hand. The gold
Madrid
bracelet on her left wrist and the matching chain
glimpsed at her throat are discreet indicators of her a Woman Aged Thirty (fig. 3)3 depicts a woman with
wealth and status. the same long nose and pendulous lower lip beneath a
With great subtlety and precision, Ter Borch slightly open mouth; the passage of a dozen years has
designed the woman’s pose to specifically complement endowed the subject with an ample double chin and a
that of her husband, who is represented in the pendant matronly physique. Although Gudlaugsson suggested
to this painting (cat. 5). The spreading bulk of her skirts that Ter Borch painted the Thyssen pendants about
bolsters the slim tapering lines of his elegant stance; the 1640 and later altered them to bring the subjects’ gar-
tilt of her ruff finds an answer in the canted brim of his ments up-to-date, more recently Gaskell has observed
hat; even the sweetly matched gestures of a gloved hand that what Gudlaugsson viewed as alterations are traces
clutching the empty mate serve to strengthen the for- of the artist’s original painting technique that have
mal and psychological bonds between the subjects. become more visible over time.4 The relatively crudely
Isolating the figures within a spacious and emphatically painted black bonnet (known as a tip or tipmuts) worn
neutral setting accentuates their sculptural qualities. by the woman in the later portrait does, however, appear
Ter Borch employed very similar poses in his Maria to have been added by another hand at a later date,
Wybouts and Jan Bardoel (the aunt and uncle of Helena largely obliterating the white lace-trimmed cap similar
van der Schalcke, cat. 14), dated by Gudlaugsson to some- to that worn by the sitter in the Richmond portrait.5
time about 1644 and 1645 (figs. 1, 2).2 The complemen- Assuming that the Thyssen and Richmond por-
tary poses and gestures that are so marvelously effec- traits depict the same person, the age inscribed on the
tive in the Richmond pendants become rather more Thyssen portrait (thirty in 1652) would indicate that the
pedestrian, however, in the three-quarter-length format young woman in the Richmond portrait would be about
and darkened backgrounds of the latter compositions. eighteen years old, which seems entirely plausible.
The subject and her husband seem to have returned MEW
to Ter Borch several years later for a second pair of por-
traits, this time in bust-length format. The Portrait of
58
7 Horsemen in front of an Inn
Peter Molijn and Gerard ter Borch

c. 1643/1645, oil on panel, 43.5 × 58.5 (17 ¡ × 23 %)
Gemäldegalerie der Akademie der Bildenden Künste, Vienna
1. Isaac van Ostade, In the early-to-mid 1640s a number of Haarlem artists, the early-to-mid 1640s, a date that is consistent not only
The Halt at the Inn,
in particular Isaac van Ostade (1621 – 1649), delighted with the landscape style but also with the costumes of
1645, oil on panel,
National Gallery of in depicting those informal moments when travelers the figures. The scene, bathed in late afternoon light,
Art, Washington, refresh themselves before a country inn, sometimes depicts an elegant group of riders who have paused on
Widener Collection
situated in a small village or at the edge of the dunes their outing at a rustic inn on a small rise before an
(fig. 1). This tradition developed during the second and expansive landscape. The horseman facing the viewer
third decades of the seventeenth century in the land- holds a glass in his right hand as he converses with
scape drawings, prints, and paintings of Esaias van de another rider and his female companion, who sits side-
Velde (c. 1590 – 1630) and other Haarlem artists.1 Title saddle behind him on their graceful steed. Another
pages to various print series published by these artists rider, straining into his horse, adjusts his saddle in
during the Twelve Years’ Truce (1609 – 1621) emphasize anticipation of his continuing journey. Standing quietly
that the etchings depicted “pleasant places” in the vicin- near this group is a soberly dressed barmaid, who holds
ity of Haarlem and were made for the enjoyment of city a jug in her right hand.
viewers. In many of these scenes travelers are shown This delightful work is particularly intriguing
passing from one village to another on meandering because it is a collaborative effort, executed by Ter
roads, occasionally resting before an inn. Precise loca- Borch and his former teacher, the landscape specialist
tions for these views were of less consequence than the Pieter Molijn, who signed the work in the lower right.
sense of delight a city dweller would receive as he visu- Just how this collaboration came about is unknown. It
ally traveled through the countryside. seems probable, however, that during the early 1640s
Horsemen in front of an Inn falls entirely within Ter Borch lived in Amsterdam or Haarlem — close
such a framework and was almost certainly executed in enough to his former teacher to allow the two artists
to communicate easily and to collaborate on various
paintings.2 In this instance, Molijn probably felt that his
former student’s elegant figures would add an important
dimension to the scene that would enhance the market-
ability of his painting.3 Not only does the scene have a
concentrated focus that differs from the picturesque
array of figures found in Isaac van Ostade’s paintings, it
also has an elegance and refinement uncharacteristic of
the genre. Particularly striking is the bright red saddle
and saddle blanket that help draw the viewer’s attention
to the mounted riders in the middle of the painting.
As Trnek has demonstrated, the artists’ collabora-
tion was far more complex and integrated than is usu-
ally seen when a figure painter adds staffage elements
to another artist’s landscape.4 Infrared reflectography
has revealed the hand of both artists in the painting’s
underdrawing. Molijn’s freely executed chalk notations
underlie both the landscape and the two figures at the
fig. 1
60
2. G
erard ter Borch, left, the barmaid and the rider holding a glass. Ter
Riders Stopping before
Borch’s carefully modeled forms define the horse and
an Inn, c. 1634, black
chalk, Rijksprenten riders in the middle and the soldier saddling his steed.
kabinet, Amsterdam The artists, then, ingeniously minimized the stylistic
differences in their individual contributions: Molijn
painted one of the riders engaged in conversation while
Ter Borch painted the others.
The figures Ter Borch depicted in this painting are
reminiscent of those in a number of study sheets pre-
served in the Ter Borch studio estate. For example, the
man adjusting his saddle on a horse seen from behind is
related to a motif in a drawing dated 1631 (see Whee-
lock essay, fig. 4), while Ter Borch treated the subject of
riders halting before an inn in a chalk drawing he prob-
ably made while studying with Molijn in Haarlem in
1634 (fig. 2). However, the figures in the painting, with
their refined demeanor and elegant costumes, convey a fig. 2
sense of graceful gentility not to be found in the draw-
ings of a decade earlier. By the mid-1640s, both Ter
Borch and Dutch society had changed. The end of the
Thirty Years’ War was close at hand, with the promise
of peace and prosperity not far behind. A K W
62
8 Adriaen Pauw van Heemstede
c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.2 (6 * × 4 ¶)

Collection Pauw van Wieldrecht, On loan to Frans Hals Museum,
Haarlem
9 Anna van Ruytenburgh, Wife of Adriaen Pauw
c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.5 (6 * × 4 •)

Collection Pauw van Wieldrecht, On loan to Frans Hals Museum,
Haarlem
At the peace negotiations in Münster (1645–1648), one The present works were probably the models for 1. Pieter Holsteyn after
Gerard ter Borch,
of the two delegates from Holland and West Friesland the figures of Pauw and his wife in a much grander
Anna van Ruytenburgh
was Adriaen Pauw van Heemstede (1585 – 1653), a vigor- commission, The Entry of Adriaen Pauw into Münster and Adriaen Pauw,
ous leader of the anti-Orange peace faction. As pen- (fig. 2).2 One of the largest paintings in Ter Borch’s oeu- 1646, engravings,
Rijksprentenkabinet,
sionary of Holland, an official of the Amsterdam vre, that canvas depicts Pauw (resembling the minia- Amsterdam
Chamber of Accounts, a director of the East India ture closely), his wife, and their granddaughter
Company, and a member of several earlier diplomatic approaching the town in a carriage. Ter Borch took
missions, Pauw was in a perfect position to represent some liberties in rendering the event (no doubt in con-
the interests of Amsterdam at the conference. sultation with Pauw). He combined Pauw’s initial
Ter Borch’s ability to communicate character as arrival on 11 January 1646, a festive entry complete with
well as status contributed greatly to his success as a a splendid coach and retainers, with his unheralded
portraitist. Here, despite the modest scale of the image, second arrival in May, when he was accompanied by his
its subject is appropriately imposing. The high, shining wife and granddaughter. Executed as a variation on the
dome of Pauw’s forehead and the levelness of his gaze traditional princely entry, the canvas might well have
help to convey the power of his personality. A simple
double collar frames his neck without distracting from
the forceful face above or the significant embellishment
below — a medal showing Pauw to be a knight of the
Order of Saint Michael.1
This work is one of at least eleven miniaturistic
portraits of delegates that Gerard painted during his
long stay in Münster (1646 – 1648) (see also cats. 10 – 12).
In all cases, he chose a small-scale, oval format, using
copper as his support. The traditional courtly associa-
tions of the miniature may have contributed to his
choice, as well as the jewel-like look of the finished
objects and their portability. In Münster Ter Borch
found a further advantage to the format, as each
painted portrait could be reproduced in an engraving
of nearly the same size. The printmaker for this image
of Pauw — and for a pendant miniature of his wife
(cat. 9) — was Pieter Holsteyn (fig. 1).
fig. 1
63
2. G
erard ter Borch and
Gerard van der Horst,
The Entry of Adriaen
Pauw into Münster,
Stadtmuseum, Mün
ster, Property of the
City of Münster
fig. 2
been meant to drive home a political point: in his pair, a bright, even light illuminates her face, revealing
ambassadorial position, Pauw could claim equal status a certain puffiness that might augur the illness that
with royalty and nobility. brought about her death in 1648. The date 1646 on
Anna van Ruytenburgh (1590 – 1648) remained in Holsteyn’s engravings after the portraits of Pauw and
Münster until April 1647. Ter Borch designed her min- Van Ruytenburgh suggests that the two miniatures and
iature portrait as a pendant to that of her husband. In the large The Entry of Adriaen Pauw into Münster were
contrast to the imposing Pauw, his wife appears modest produced at the same time.
in demeanor and somewhat fragile. She wears a conser- Anna came from a well-to-do merchant family.
vative though fashionable set of collars: a tasseled Rembrandt portrayed her younger brother, Willem van
organdy layer on top of elaborately worked lace. A fine Ruytenburgh, as the dashing lieutenant at the head of
brooch centered on her breast echoes Pauw’s medal. the militia company in the Nightwatch, 1642. A M K
Because portraits were usually lit from the left and
wives were traditionally placed to the right in a pendant
64
10 Godard van Reede van Nederhorst
c. 1646, oil on copper, 15 × 11 (5 ¢ × 4 &)

Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam
1. Anselm van Hulle, Godard van Reede van Nederhorst (1588 – 1648), the
Godard van Reede
delegate from Utrecht, caused considerable difficulty
van Nederhorst, oil
on canvas, Centraal within the Dutch delegation at Münster because of
Museum, Utrecht his opposition to the peace accords, his generally
pro-French policies, and his personal antagonism to
Adriaen Pauw. Although Van Reede refused to sign the
treaty of 30 January 1648, he finally acceded to the order
of the Staten of Utrecht and added his signature in
April. His health had deteriorated so severely during
this period that he was unable to attend the ceremony
of the Oath of Ratification on 15 May (commemorated
in Ter Borch’s painting, cat. 13). He died back home on
25 June 1648 and was buried in the Utrecht cathedral.
Two versions of this portrait exist, both executed fig. 1
by Ter Borch and both originally retained by the sitter’s

descendants at Slot Zuylen. Van Reede also commis-
sioned a portrait from the Flemish artist Anselm van
Hulle, Ter Borch’s main competition in Münster, who
turned out conventional, life-size likenesses with record
speed (fig. 1). A M K
66
11 Caspar van Kinschot
1646/1647, oil on copper, 11 × 8 (4 & × 3 ¡)

Private collection, On long-term loan to the Royal Cabinet
of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague
1. The Swearing of the Caspar van Kinschot (1622 – 1649), the youngest mem-
Oath of Ratification of
ber of the Dutch delegation, received a less formal treat-
the Treaty of Münster
(detail of cat. 13) ment than Ter Borch’s other sitters in Münster. In an
appropriate concession to Van Kinschot’s youth, the
miniature shows him with flowing locks falling to his
chest. He also sports a fancy, colorful doublet. (By con-
trast, he wore conservative black at the ratification cer-
emony, according to the Swearing of the Oath of Ratifi
cation of the Treaty of Münster, fig. 1). Ter Borch’s
brushwork here is relatively broad. Contributing to the
warm, lively effect, he scattered flecks of brown and
white and even some blue throughout the predomi-
nantly greenish-gray doublet.
Despite his youth at the time of the negotiations,
Van Kinschot received recognition for his legal abilities,
his language fluency, and his skill as a writer of Neo-
Latin poetry. Among those who befriended him during
his years in Münster was Fabio Chigi, the papal del-
egate who later became Pope Alexander VII.1 The
fig. 1
young man’s ruddy complexion in this portrait, with its
vigorous contrasts of light and dark, gives an impres-
sion of good health that was temporary, for he died of
consumption just a few years later. A M K
68
12 Don Caspar de Bracamonte y Guzman, Count of Peñaranda
1647/1648, oil on copper, 10.5 × 9 (4¡ × 3∞)

Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam
1. The Swearing of the In 1634 King Philip IV of Spain appointed Caspar de ning of his stay in Münster. Ter Borch actually joined
Bracamonte y Guzman, Count of Peñaranda, to a high Peñaranda’s entourage in 1647 and most likely painted
(detail of cat. 13) position at court. Eleven years later he became Spain’s this portrait soon thereafter. He presents an aristo-
chief delegate to the peace congress in Münster charged cratic head, notable for its heightened cranium and
with bringing a formal conclusion to the Eighty Years’ the piercing intelligence of the sitter’s gaze. A stand-up
War. Arriving with an entourage numbering well over collar (golilla) of paper-thin organdy, characteristic of
a hundred, Peñaranda took up residence at the Obser- the Spanish courtier, sets off the head with an upward
vantenkloster, the Franciscan friary. There he enter- thrust that counterbalances the sharply downward-
tained in a grand style, while complaining in letters sloping movement of Peñaranda’s cape. This composi-
home about the privations he suffered. But early in 1646 tional device adds a crisp decisiveness to the portrait
he inaugurated a new era for the Dutch by announcing as a whole. The dark purple cape itself, elaborately
Spain’s recognition of the United Provinces as free and trimmed with gold embroidery, parts just enough to
sovereign territory. And during the long years of nego- allow a glimpse of the sitter’s scarlet doublet. The full
tiation (1645 – 1648), he distinguished himself for his effect matches perfectly with what documentary
patience and intelligence (fig. 1). sources relate about Peñaranda’s personality: his dig-
Because of Ter Borch’s association with Adriaen nity, sophistication, and love of splendor.
Pauw — who was leader of the pro-peace (and therefore After his years in Münster, Peñaranda moved
pro-Spanish) faction among the Dutch — the artist must briefly to Brussels (1650), then to Madrid; he later
have had some contact with Peñaranda from the begin- became Spain’s viceroy in Naples (1659 – 1654). A M K
fig. 1
70
13 The Swearing of the Oath of Ratification of the Treaty of Münster, 15 May 1648
1648, oil on copper, 45.4 × 58.5 (17 ¢ × 23 %)

1. Anonymous, published The swearing of the oath of ratification of the Treaty appear to be swearing simultaneously rather than in
by Rombout van der
of Münster took place on 15 May 1648. This small oil succession. Such choices subvert literalism but serve
Hoeye, The Swearing of
the Oath of Ratification on copper is the only painted depiction of that event, an artistic purpose, adding clarity to the group portrait
of the Treaty of Münster, which brought a formal conclusion to the Eighty Years’ and cohesion to the composition.
15 May 1648, engrav
ing, Rijksprenten War between Spain and the Dutch Republic (1568 – More important are the formal means by which
kabinet, Amsterdam 1648). Ter Borch portrayed about seventy-seven partici- Ter Borch conveyed the oath’s larger historical signifi-
pants and witnesses to the ceremony, all crowded into cance. In contrast to the approach of contemporary
the main chamber of the Münster town hall. Signato- broadsides representing the event (fig. 1), he refused to
ries are grouped behind a round table in the center of let Dutch independence become his central focus, and
the composition. Barthold van Gent, the representative allowed no single political allegiance or religious posi-
from Gelderland, holds in his left hand the paper on tion to hold sway. He balanced the horizontal, frieze-
which the Dutch delegation’s oath has been inscribed; like crowd with a strong vertical movement at the cen-
his right hand is raised. Directly next to him in the ter of the image, culminating in the glowing candela-
front rank, the Count of Peñaranda holds the oath of brum. Its sculpted Madonna (rendered larger than
the Spanish delegation. His right hand rests on a book, actuality) shines her rays on Dutch and Spanish, Prot-
as does the hand of Antoine Brun (in silver gray), repre- estant and Catholic, alike. The two sides are so little
sentative of the Spanish Netherlands. Using a tradi- differentiated from each other that their separate ways
tional artistic device to proclaim himself an eyewitness of oath-taking — much commented upon at the
to the event, Ter Borch inserted a self-portrait at the far time — are here given a measure of equivalence. Indi-
left, next to a soldier wearing the colors of Münster. vidual participants are not singled out but rather
Written accounts of the occasion reveal Ter Borch’s bonded together in idealized solidarity, suggesting
conscientious effort to anchor his image in actuality.1 In
minute detail he described the documents and boxes on
the green velvet tablecloth, the Renaissance woodwork
of the hall, the star-studded canopy at the rear, and the
sixteenth-century candelabrum above. This last (still
extant) bears the Münster coat of arms along with a
prominent image of the Madonna in an aureole. Such
localizing detail tied the image to one particular place
and time, guaranteeing the historic truthfulness of the
painting. In addition, Ter Borch was careful to specify
the differing gestures of the delegates. Six Netherland-
ers hold up their right hands with a pair of fingers
raised, while two Spanish representatives stretch their
right hands out to a cross and Gospel.2 Nevertheless,
the image departs from written accounts in a number
of ways. For example, Ter Borch showed all of the par-
ticipants posed in a tight semicircle. The principals face
outward rather than looking at one another. They also
fig. 1
72
2. J onas Suyderhoef after a common concern for the success of the treaty. The
Gerard ter Borch, The
painting’s point of view is resolutely international and
Swearing of the Oath
of Ratification of the universal rather than local and partisan.
Treaty of Münster, 15 The iconography and composition of the Treaty of
May 1648, engraving,
Rijksprentenkabinet, Münster were without precedent in the medium of oil
Amsterdam painting. Painters had traditionally framed contempo-
rary political subjects in allegorical terms. Printmakers,
by contrast (in broadsides such as fig. 1), often sought to
depict recent events with a degree of historical accuracy.
Given Ter Borch’s “factual” approach to his subject, it is
hardly surprising that he used this work as a highly fin-
ished preparatory study for a print.3 Soon after com-
pleting the image, he asked the Haarlem engraver Jonas
Suyderhoef to reproduce it in a print of exactly the same
size, which was ready for sale by 1650 (fig. 2). Did Ter
Borch also hope to find a buyer for the painting itself?
That remains an open question, as no commission has
ever been found and nothing connects the work to any
single delegate. Indeed, if Ter Borch’s biographer fig. 2
Arnold Houbraken is to be believed, he set an impos-

sibly high asking price for the work, a whopping 6,000 improved considerably. Acquired in 1871 by the
florins, which surely placed a huge hurdle in the way of National Gallery, London, the painting continued to be
a sale.4 Perhaps the artist wished to keep this image for understood by many scholars (somewhat anachronisti-
himself, as a personal memento of a momentous occa- cally) as an example of the genre historique. But the
sion. Whatever the reason, the painting remained in image might better be viewed as a singular innovation
Deventer during his lifetime, accessible to few viewers at the time of its creation. A successful amalgam of por-
beyond the Ter Borch family.5 traiture and history painting, this work combines real-
The larger public came to know this image as a ist pictorial techniques with echoes of solemn ancient
print designed for widespread distribution. Only in the ceremonies. As proved by the celebrations of the 400th
late eighteenth century did the painting finally leave anniversary of the Treaty of Münster, Ter Borch’s
Deventer. In mid-nineteenth-century Paris, it changed painting has now acquired the status of a historical
hands several times at prices unthinkable a century and document, equal in authority to a written account. But
a half before. By then, market conditions for factually it has always been more than that. A M K
oriented paintings of contemporary events — which
came to be known as genre historique works — had
74
14 Helena van der Schalcke
c. 1648, oil on panel, 34 × 28.5 (13 ™ × 11 @)

In this deceptively simple and disarmingly direct like- painted in Haarlem following the artist’s return from 1. Gerard ter Borch,
Gerard van der Schalcke,
ness, Ter Borch created one of the seventeenth centu- Münster in the spring of 1648. A few years earlier,
1644, oil on panel,
ry’s most memorable images of childhood. By drawing the artist had painted portraits of Helena’s parents — Rijksmuseum,
attention to huge dark eyes set in a pale pinched face Gerard in 1644 and Johanna in 1645, the latter presum- Amsterdam
and to the small hand plucking ineffectually at her ably upon the occasion of the couple’s marriage in June
2. Gerard ter Borch,
skirt, the artist poignantly conveyed the fragility and 1645 (figs. 1, 2).2 He portrayed Helena’s aunt and uncle, Johanna Bardoel, 1645,
vulnerability of his frail young sitter. He heightened Jan (Johan) Bardoel and Maria Wybouts, also about oil on panel, Rijks
museum, Amsterdam
this effect by isolating the figure in a shadowy unde- 1644 and 1645 (see cat. 6, figs. 1, 2).3 The portraits of
fined space, devoid of cozy attributes or any means of the four adults are slightly smaller than the portrait of
physical support. Helena, but nearly identical in size and format, depict-
The subject of this charming portrait, Helena van ing the subjects at three-quarter length and closer to
der Schalcke, was the daughter of Gerard Abrahamsz the picture plane, within an oval surround.
van der Schalcke (1609–1667), a yarn and cloth mer- Helena is dressed in a creamy white bodice and
chant in Haarlem, and his second wife, Johanna Bar- skirt combination, with a lace-trimmed kerchief and
doel (1603–after 1669).1 Helena was baptized in Haar- apron, and a close-fitting cap covering her fine blond
lem on 25 September 1646. She married Nicolaes hair. The most prominent feature of her costume is the
Eichelberg, a Haarlem merchant, on 14 December 1666. heavy double-stranded gold chain slung across her
Helena was only twenty-four years old when she died: chest and fixed to either shoulder with bows of pink
she was buried in the Grote Kerk in Haarlem on 14 ribbon. She holds a carnation and carries a covered
April 1671. The couple had one daughter, Agneta (1671– wicker basket. The carnation was a common attribute
1749), who inherited the portrait from her mother. in portraits from the fifteenth century; because of its
Ter Borch’s sympathetic likeness, which shows association with images of the Virgin and child, it is
Helena at about two years of age, was presumably frequently interpreted as a symbol of divine love, resur-
fig. 1 fig. 2
75
rection, and the hope of eternal life.4 Leading strings — 3. Govaert Flinck, Girl
by a High Chair, 1640,
the long bands hanging down from the shoulders of
oil on canvas, Royal
Helena’s bodice, visible just behind her right elbow — Cabinet of Paintings,
were a standard feature of children’s dress in the six- Mauritshuis, The
Hague
teenth and seventeenth centuries, enabling adults to
support and guide a toddler’s first tentative steps.5
Gudlaugsson noted the close similarity of the pres-
ent picture to Govaert Flinck’s 1640 portrait of a young
girl standing by a high chair (fig. 3) and proposed that
Ter Borch must have been familiar with this painting.6
Admittedly, both children are depicted at full length,
turned three-quarters to the right, dressed in white,
and carrying a wicker basket with a black handle; but as
Ekkart has more recently noted, evidence for a specific
relationship between the two works is far from conclu-
sive,7 and Helena’s ethereal presence is a far cry from
the rosy-cheeked solidity of Flinck’s young subject.
MEW
fig. 3
77
15 Scene in an Inn
c. 1648/1650, oil on panel, 24.7 × 18.4 (9 # × 7 @)

Private collection
No painting in Ter Borch’s oeuvre conveys with such human interactions play out with little of the restraint
overwhelming power the emotion of loneliness and to be found in court circles. Smoking, drinking, and
despair. As a young swarthy male, all dressed up with sexually charged encounters between male and female
nowhere to go, absentmindedly fingers grains of snuff were common fare in Flemish art, often in series
in the silver snuffbox in his hand, he gazes blankly devoted to the depiction of the five senses. Ter Borch
ahead with unfocused eyes. A concerned friend, seated seems to have thought in terms of pendants during this
across the rustic table, looks toward him sympatheti- period of his career and probably conceived this paint-
cally but with mouth closed, as though unsure of what ing as one of a pair of inn scenes, the other being
to say to alleviate his emotional burden. Behind the Encouragement to Drink, which has approximately the
pair stands another young friend, who suggestively same dimensions.3 These two works, which exhibit such
grasps the neck of a straw-covered wine bottle firmly contrary emotional experiences of joy and despair,
in his hand as he looks out at the viewer with a telling combine between them all five senses: taste, touch,
expression. smell, sight, and sound. Stylistically, however, Ter
The model for this unusual painting was a member Borch’s tightly focused, half-length compositions seem
of the Spanish delegation to Münster for the signing of to owe little to Brouwer or Teniers, who preferred mul-
the treaty in 1648.1 This young man, with his long black tifigured compositions set into a larger interior space.
hair and distinctive moustache, is the sixth figure from Nevertheless, a tradition of half-length images did exist
the right in the back row of Ter Borch’s painting of that in Flemish art for depicting figures representing the five
historic event (see cat. 13). In that painting he is dressed senses.4 It may well be that Ter Borch sought to work
as a member of the Spanish court, which indicates that within this tradition for these works, a tradition that
he was one of the entourage associated with the Count he would then continue to develop as one of his major
of Peñaranda (cat. 12). In all likelihood, Ter Borch innovations in genre painting (see cats. 19, 20, 28).5
befriended this individual in Münster or when he trav- Scenes of tobacco smoking abound in Dutch and
eled to Brussels with the delegation attached to the Flemish art. Once tobacco began to be imported from
Count of Peñaranda after the signing of the treaty on 15 the New World at the end of the sixteenth century, its
May 1648. When Ter Borch asked him to sit for this low- use was widespread, not only for its supposed medicinal
life genre scene he dressed him in a flat beret and light- properties, but also for the pleasure it afforded. Its role,
colored, striped outfit, similar in style to those worn by both positive and negative, was widely discussed in
musicians or by actors performing in the commedia contemporary literature. Some authors argued that it
dell’arte.2 This flamboyant costume, with its implicit was an herbal panacea against disease and the plague,
promise of high spirits and joviality, served Ter Borch while others distrusted the idea of smoking for pleasure
well as a foil to the figure’s somber and dejected mood. and condemned tobacco because of its narcotic effects.6
While in Brussels in the late 1640s the artist must The dazed and stupefying effects it brought about were
have been exposed once again to Flemish genre scenes compared to those induced by alcohol, and to be
by artists such as Adriaen Brouwer and David Teniers “tobacco drunk” was a common expression.7 Indeed,
II. In any event, at about this time he decided to turn
his attention to inn scenes such as this one, where
78
1. “Van roock werd ick beer drinking and pipe smoking were frequently
ghevoedt” (I was fed
enjoyed together, and numerous seventeenth-century
with smoke), from
Jacob Cats, Silenus tavern scenes depict revelers holding a clay pipe in one
Alcibiadis, sive, Proteus hand and a beer stein in the other.
(Amsterdam, 1620)
Drinking and smoking, however, were also means
by which young men and women sought to drown their
sorrows, particularly those brought about by love’s
emotional torments. One of Jacob Cats’ emblems (fig. 1)
even identifies Cupid as a merchant whose “merchan-
dise is tobacco, mostly to be smoked in pipes/ With a
bit of smoke and fog he confuses our senses/ He gives
us smoke to drink and smoke to eat;/ All of Venus’s citi-
zens live on nothing else.”8 Although the young man in
Ter Borch’s painting is not smoking tobacco from a pipe,
he is ingesting it with snuff, which carried equal, if not
more powerful narcotic effects. Snuff taking was not so
prevalent in the Netherlands at this period, but it was fig. 1
rather common in court circles in France and Spain,
which, given the model who sat for this work, may
explain its depiction in this painting.9 A K W
80
16 Woman at a Mirror
1650, oil on panel, 34 × 26 (13 ™ × 10 @)

Gerard began using his half sister Gesina as his model considerable compositional force. But the brilliantly 1. Gerard ter Borch,
Two Studies of Gesina,
about 1650. He featured her in a number of works in illuminated face in the mirror forms the focal point,
c. 1648 – 1649, pencil,
different guises — for example, as a peasant girl or as a with its animated pattern of light and half shadow. The black chalk, brown ink,
shepherdess — primarily determined by her costume.1 two other figures enrich the composition psychologi- Rijksprentenkabinet,
Amsterdam
In this small painting, she wears a white satin gown cally. The page holding the mirror gazes intently on the
trimmed with gold braid that immediately signals her girl’s beauty, while the maid looks down mutely, her 2. M
oses ter Borch, Old
Woman before a Mirror,
status as a highborn lady. Contemporary documents unassuming dress and hood creating a foil for the fancy with Two Maidservants,
indicate that elements of this dress correspond to the braids and shimmering textures of the central figure. c. 1658, brush in black
over traces of black
actual attire of wealthy women of the period. Ter Borch The cluster of heads gives the image an unusually tight chalk, Rijksprenten
painted the same garment in numerous works during formal structure, while the relatively loose, flowing kabinet, Amsterdam
the 1650s. Even as late as about 1662 it appears in The abundance of fabric enhances its effect of intimacy.3
Introduction with Gesina again as model (cat. 36). The image of a lovely young woman juxtaposed
Gesina’s countenance in Woman at a Mirror can with a mirror appears several times in Ter Borch’s oeu-
be compared with the portrait sketch that Gerard pro- vre (cats. 17, 27, 34) and comes freighted with multiple
duced a year or two before (fig. 1).2 Although later he associations. Past scholars connected the Amsterdam
sometimes took liberties with Gesina’s appearance, in painting with the theme of vanity and transience, citing
this painting of his early maturity he carefully recorded pictorial allegories in which a mirror is a sign of a wom-
her physical features. The elegant, curving shapes of the an’s frivolous preoccupation with her appearance.4 The
figure’s back, and especially of her arching neck, carry artist’s half brother Moses copied just such an allegory,
fig. 1 fig. 2
81
a print of a gussied-up old woman at her dressing table she does so innocently. Ter Borch makes the attributes
by Jeremias Falck after Bernardo Strozzi (fig. 2).5 Alter- of her dressing table indistinct; only a cosmetic box
natively, the three-quarter format of the present work accompanies the mirror. He gives the girl a modest,
and its inclusion of a boy holding the mirror might sug- high neckline; and most important he turns her away
gest the old mythological theme of Venus at her toilet, from her own image.8 The narrative may remain elu-
which is so strongly represented in Italian and Flemish sive — perhaps it is a glimpse of the private uncertainty
art.6 The central position of the mirror here links the of a girl on the verge of entering the public arena — but
image most immediately with themes of beauty and the in no sense does it violate burgher decorum. A M K
sense of sight, often closely associated with sensual
love.7 Yet if the young woman alludes to sensual beauty,
83
17 A Young Woman at Her Toilet with a Maid
c. 1650/1651, oil on wood, 47.6 × 34.6 (18 # × 13 £)

Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,
Gift of J. Pierpont Morgan, 1917
1. Gerard ter Borch, A Young Woman at Her Toilet with a Maid,1 painted in
Woman at Her Dressing
about 1650, is probably the first painting in which Ter
Table, oil on panel,
present location Borch chose an elegant domestic interior — rather than
unknown a more humble locale — as the setting for his full-length
figures. The painting is often seen as inaugurating the
fashion for the sophisticated “high-life” genre scenes
that dominated Dutch painting through the latter part
of the century.2 It depicts a young woman standing in
profile before her dressing table, craning her seductively
bared neck as she attends to some fine adjustment of
her corsage. A faint smile betrays her pleasurable pre-
occupation in these sartorial endeavors. The dark gar-
ments and compact stature of the maid, standing
patiently to the left, create a perfect foil for the sinuous
elegance of the young lady’s sway-backed pose and
bright, shimmering garments. A very similar figure is
fig. 1
depicted seated and facing left in Ter Borch’s diminu-
tive Woman at Her Dressing Table (fig. 1), which prob-
ably slightly predates the present painting.3 In this pic- bolic connotations, which would have been immedi-
ture, the use of a circular format further emphasizes ately understood by the contemporary viewer: in this
the tidy system of interlocking arcs that gracefully case, the ebony-framed mirror as a symbol of vanitas,
define the woman’s upper body. the gleaming silver ewer and basin borne by the maid
Gesina ter Borch probably served as the model as a symbol of purity.4 Though this particular combina-
for the young woman in both these pictures, as she tion of motifs is very nearly ubiquitous in depictions of
did in so many of the artist’s paintings of the 1650s and a lady’s toilet, Ter Borch forwent the overt didacticism
1660s. Much of the intimate charm of A Young Woman often found in these works.
at Her Toilet with a Maid is undeniably due to Ter As Liedtke has noted, the maid forms a crucial link
Borch’s close, familial observation of mundane femi- in the scene’s narrative.5 While the young woman
nine activities. fusses with her bodice, the maid stands discreetly by,
For all its naturalism, however, Ter Borch’s paint- peering at her mistress’ reflected image. She waits
ing is a remarkably sophisticated combination of realis- patiently with all the requisite tools for the hand wash-
tic detail and symbolic reference. In the language of ing that will mark the end of this private ritual of self-
seventeenth-century imagery, many of the items com- absorption, the turning away from vain preoccupations.
monly associated with a lady’s toilet also carried sym- Capturing all attention at the precise center of the com-
position, the young woman is poised equidistant
between two symbolic poles, a deliciously innocent
84
2. G
erard ter Borch, (and entirely natural) embodiment of both virtue and
Woman Washing Her
vice. With subtle gestures and a single glance, Ter
Hands, c. 1655, oil
on panel, Gemälde Borch constructed a delicate tension between the sym-
galerie Alte Meister, bolic elements, leaving the viewer to ponder the impli-
Staatliche Kunstsamm
lungen, Dresden cations. Ter Borch’s Woman Washing Her Hands in
Dresden (fig. 2), from about 1655, presents a later, more
fully resolved (and thus less psychologically charged)
moment in the domestic narrative: there the woman
cleanses her hands, presumably upon the completion
of her toilet.
The finely tempered formal and psychological bal-
ance of Ter Borch’s Young Woman at Her Toilet with a
Maid is a vivid reminder that few painters have been so
attuned to the gentle cadences of the feminine sensibil-
ity. Sensitive to minute details of the domestic situation,
he understood the inherent satisfaction of small things
in a silent, placid, and orderly world. M E W
fig. 2
86
18 The Reading Lesson
c. 1652, oil on panel, 27 × 25 (10 £ × 9 ¶)

Musée du Louvre, Paris, Département des Peintures,
Legs la Caze, 1869
Themes of education and instruction abound in A similarly relaxed moment is recorded in Jacques de 1. Cornelis Drebbel
after Hendrik Goltzius,
seventeenth-century Dutch images of childhood: the Gheyn’s circa 1600 drawing of a mother and child look-
Grammatica, etching,
village schoolhouse filled with rambunctious brats or ing at a sketchbook; for all its apparent naturalism, Rijksprentenkabinet,
disciplined scholars, the artist’s studio, the night school, however, this drawing has been also interpreted as an Amsterdam
and parents or other adults imparting to young chil- allegory of Ingenium, the initial stage of the learning
dren domestic skills, proper conduct, or primary lit- process.4
eracy. While the large number of works depicting chil- Ter Borch’s composition is drawn tightly around
dren receiving instruction in reading and writing may the figure of a woman seated in profile to the left, wear-
have been a factor of the era’s unprecedentedly high ing a fur-trimmed jak over a yellow and black bodice,
literacy rate, the images also stress the virtues of educa- red-brown apron, and greenish skirt. On her head is a
tion as part of the child’s overall development, and the close-fitting black cap, with a pearl earbob suspended
parents’ responsibility to properly guide and nurture against her cheek. Standing at her knee and reading
their children.1 These mundane scenes of parents from the book spread open on her lap is a small child,
imparting basic language skills are rooted in traditional his chubby cheeks and pert nose nearly hidden beneath
allegorical depictions of Grammar (Grammatica), one an unruly mop of reddish hair. The model for the tousle-
of the seven liberal arts. Both practically and allegori- headed child was Ter Borch’s younger half brother,
cally, grammar was considered a fundamental disci-
pline, which of necessity had to be mastered before
other arts could be studied; generally speaking, images
of Grammar thus featured the very youngest scholars.
Gudlaugsson related Ter Borch’s Reading Lesson
to an engraving by Cornelis Drebbel after Hendrik
Goltzius of Grammatica, in which a schoolmistress
directs a child in mastering the alphabet as an older
reader looks on (fig. 1).2 As in Goltzius’ print, most sev-
enteenth-century images of women or men teaching a
child to read assign the adult an active role in the pro-
ceedings. They patiently point out the text (or not so
patiently, in the case of some images deriding school-
masters by Jan Steen and others) and concretely aid the
child’s acquisition of fundamental reading skills.3
Imparting and receiving knowledge are given equal
weight, equal responsibility. Although it shares many
formal traits with these images, Ter Borch’s ruminative
Reading Lesson is not governed by the rules of proper
pedagogic practice. While the child concentrates his
attention on the text before him, the woman has
allowed hers to wander, distracted by the spoken
words — or just as conceivably, distracted from them.
fig. 1
87
Moses, born in 1645 and thus depicted here at about Borch also manages to evoke the measured progress of
seven years of age; the model for the woman was the time in this simple painting: an elastic moment sus-
artist’s stepmother, Wiesken Matthys. pended between words puzzled softly, tentatively, but
The massive tome from which the boy reads is very with gathering comprehension, from the printed page.
possibly that most common of household books, a Bible, Formally and thematically, Frans van Mieris’
yet the painting is as free of religious or moralizing Child’s Lesson, painted in about 1663, is strongly depen-
overtones as it is of extraneous formal elements. Ter dent on Ter Borch’s Reading Lesson.5 In this painting as
Borch appears sublimely uninterested, moreover, in well, a young child stands reading a book resting on his
proclaiming the practical and moral benefits of a sound mother’s lap, while her gaze is directed elsewhere: in
education, and instead explores the intangible boons of this case, toward an older man (possibly a tutor) stand-
the domestic experience, the unquantifiable content- ing in the shadows. M E W
ments of a bond forged between mother and child. The
woman’s reflective mood comfortably accommodates
and passively encourages the boy’s laborious efforts. Ter
88
19 Woman Combing a Child’s Hair
c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 33.5 × 29 (13 ^ × 11 *)

Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague
1. Quiringh van In a simple interior distinguished by a shallow arched

Brekelenkam, Old
niche at the rear wall and a sliver of light emanating
Woman Combing a
Child’s Hair, 1648, oil from a window at far right, a woman combs the head
on panel, Stedelijk of the young child standing before her. Clad in a red
Museum de Lakenhal,
Leiden skirt, white neck cloth, and a fur-trimmed jak, her hair
caught up in a close-fitting black cap, she pays close
attention to the nimble movements of her hands as
she carefully inspects the child’s hair for lice. The
dreamy young child — a boy, apparently, to judge from
the smock1 — leans patiently against the reassuring
bulk of the woman’s knees for the duration of her min-
istrations. He clutches an apple tightly in his hands.
Lining the shallow shelf along the back wall are a crum-
pled cloth, an earthenware jug, a roemer, and various
other objects.
Combing a child’s hair to rid him or her of lice was
a common everyday activity and probably an essential
household task in the seventeenth-century Netherlands.
fig. 1
It was the subject of numerous genre paintings from the
middle of the century; among the earliest is Dirck Hals’
Moederzorg (Mother’s Care) of 1631 (Stichting De Boer, Visscher illustrated a comb beneath the caption “Purgat
Amsterdam), a simple scene of a mother grooming a et ornat” (To cleanse and adorn); the perennially popu-
child’s hair by lamplight. Quiringh van Brekelenkam lar poet Jacob Cats expounded on hair combing as
(fig. 1), Gerard Dou, and Pieter de Hooch also treated being not solely an act of caring for one’s outside
the theme, as did the Bamboccianti artists Michael appearance, but also a metaphor for putting one’s head
Sweerts and Jan Miel.2 Ter Borch himself included the in good spiritual order: “Comb, comb, again and again,
motif in the The Grinder’s Family of about 1653 (cat. 24). and not just the hair, But also what lies hidden inside,
In nearly all of these images, the dreamy, almost slack- to the heartfelt bone.”3 The act of combing a child’s hair
jawed relaxation of the children being groomed effec- also attested to a mother’s diligence in performing her
tively conjures up the calming, ritualistic aspects of maternal duties. Playing on the word “louse,” a contem-
methodical combing and delousing. porary proverb by Johan de Brune invoked delousing as
Like many common household activities, the act of a metaphor for the need to discipline children: “Lazy
combing and delousing a child’s hair was given a sym- mother, lousy heads [kids].”4 Although images of comb-
bolic gloss by seventeenth-century moralists. In Sinne ing a child’s head for lice had generally positive conno-
poppen (1614), the moralist and emblematist Roemer tations in the Netherlands, it was (rather predictably)
regarded as a deplorably tasteless subject by contempo-
rary Italian writers and critics.5
90
Gudlaugsson considered Woman Combing a the model in the Rotterdam painting is situated much
Child’s Hair to be a pendant to Woman Spinning (cat. lower in the picture than in the present painting, pre-
20), a view that is still maintained by some scholars.6 senting a rather awkward transition when the two
Though these knee-length images of women peaceably paintings are viewed side by side. The execution and
engaged in domestic tasks are similar in size and com- surface finish of the two paintings are also quite differ-
plementarily composed, there is nothing to indicate ent, underscoring the artist’s masterfully nuanced
that Ter Borch conceived the two paintings as pendants. manipulation of technique: Ter Borch utilized rather
The seventeenth-century history of the pictures is not soft, diffused brushwork to depict the homely necessity
known, and in the eighteenth century, the paintings of combing a child’s head for lice, but a more polished
seem to have been united in the Delfos collection for and finely detailed technique to detail the skilled pas-
barely two years (from 1784 to 1786).7 The fact that the time of a well-to-do housewife. M E W
same model (the artist’s stepmother, Wiesken Matthys)
appears in both pictures would seem to argue against
their pairing. Furthermore, as Broos has pointed out,8
92
93
20 Woman Spinning
c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 34.5 × 27.5 (13 ∞ × 10 ¶)

Willem van der Vorm Foundation, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen,
Rotterdam
1. Nicolaes Maes, Old Seated in a low wooden chair set beside a fireplace, a
Woman Spinning, 1655,
woman pulls fibers from a bundle of wool in prepara-
oil on canvas, Rijks
museum, Amsterdam tion for spinning a length of thread. She leans forward
into the light, as if to examine the fineness of her thread.
She wears a black fur-trimmed jak over a gray skirt and
creamy white neck cloth; nestled in the folds of her
green apron is a small lapdog, its bright inquisitive
gaze at odds with its contented pose. At lower right, a
glimpse of a red seat cushion adds a vivid flash of color.
In literature and the visual arts, spinning was a
time-honored symbol of diligence, purity, and commit-
ment to the home. In the book of Proverbs, Solomon
lists spinning as among the laudable tasks of a virtuous
woman: “She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh will-
ingly with her hands” (31:13); and “She layeth her hands
to the distaff, and her hands hold the spindle” (31:19).
These passages were repeatedly invoked and para-
phrased by seventeenth-century moralists such as Jacob
Cats, one of many writers to equate domesticity, and
particularly spinning, with feminine virtue: “motivated
by the sheer pleasure of spinning; / She makes her fam-
fig. 1
ily turn the spindle / For the good of the house, in the
service of her husband.”1 The woman in Ter Borch’s
painting is shown teasing fibers from a bundle of wool old women depicted by Nicolaes Maes (fig. 1), to the
to form a thread, which will then be fed onto the bob- most refined, represented by Caspar Netscher’s
bin of the spinning wheel. Franits has suggested that by coquettish young spinner (fig. 2).4 Spinning was pri-
drawing attention to the thread held taut between her marily seen as a pleasant (and virtuously productive)
hands, the woman in Ter Borch’s painting might repre- leisure activity rather than as a strictly utilitarian chore,
sent a reference to Cats’ proverb “Ze spint zuiver garen” which seems perfectly in keeping with the elaborate
(She spins pure thread), in a nod to both her domestic turnings and varied woods of the spinning wheel
skills and her untarnished reputation.2 Ter Borch depicted so meticulously in his painting.
Although by the seventeenth century the success Ter Borch’s Woman Spinning, like most seventeenth-
of the commercial textile industry in Haarlem and century Dutch images of women engaged in this
Leiden had virtually eliminated the need for most domestic task, presents a soothing, unhurried oasis of
women to spin for household use, spinning remained domestic industry and contentment. With characteris-
a ubiquitous symbol of domestic virtue.3 It was an tic economy and finesse, Ter Borch captured the exqui-
activity that spanned a broad socioeconomic spectrum,
from the most humble practitioners, like the gnarled
94
2. C aspar Netscher, Lady site beauty of the moment, vividly conveying his mod-
Seated at a Spinning
el’s complete absorption and satisfaction in the skilled
Wheel, 1665, oil on
panel, The National accomplishment of a familiar task.
Gallery, London The model for this peaceably industrious figure was
Ter Borch’s stepmother, Wiesken Matthys. A frequent
model for the artist during these years, Wiesken can
also be seen in the Reading Lesson and the Woman
Combing a Child’s Hair (cats. 18, 19). Franits described
the Rotterdam Woman Spinning as “one of the few
seventeenth-century Dutch portraits of a woman spin-
ning,”5 and regarded both the Woman Spinning and its
putative pendant, the Woman Combing a Child’s Hair,6
as “genrefied portraits”: portraits that depict the sitter
in the context of everyday domestic tasks rather than
surrounded by the more customary ennobling refer-
ences to history or literature. Even though the model
is so readily identifiable, Ter Borch probably did not
regard these pictures of his stepmother — or indeed any
genre paintings that used family members, friends, or
colleagues as models — as portraits. Apart from the
obvious practical benefits of using models easily avail-
fig. 2
able at home or in the studio, daily proximity to his
subjects allowed Ter Borch ample opportunity for the
intimate observation of routine events and everyday
rituals, thus enabling him to impart a greater sense of
realism to his fictionalized genre compositions.
In 1779, while Ter Borch’s Woman Spinning was in
the Tak collection, the still-life painter Aert Schouman
(1710 – 1792) made a detailed drawing after it. A few
years later, while the painting was in his own collection,
Abraham Delfos made a watercolor copy (Rijksprenten
kabinet, Amsterdam), adding a landscape painting on
the rear wall.7 M E W
96
21 Jan van Goyen
c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 20 × 16 (7 ¢ × 6 &)

Collections of the Prince of and in Liechtenstein, Vaduz
Jan van Goyen, one of the most inventive, influential, Rembrandt had an immediate and profound impact on 1. Rembrandt van Rijn,
Self-Portrait, 1639,
and prolific Dutch landscape painters of the seven- portraiture in the Netherlands, particularly in the
etching and drypoint,
teenth century, was born in Leiden in 1596. While his realm of artists’ self-portraits.3 An impression of Rem- Rijksprentenkabinet,
early landscape paintings resemble those of his teacher, brandt’s Self-Portrait may have been among the prints Amsterdam
Esaias van de Velde, from the late 1620s Van Goyen was by the artist (mostly from the 1630s) owned by the Ter
a leading figure in the development of more naturalistic Borch family,4 but in any event Gerard would certainly
“tonal” landscapes. In countless paintings and drawings, have been aware of this enormously influential compo-
Van Goyen celebrated the quiet beauty of the Dutch sition. Unlike the works by Rembrandt, however, and
countryside and its omnipresent waterways. Van Goyen unlike most of the portraits inspired by them, Ter
lived in The Hague from 1632 until the end of his life, Borch’s Jan van Goyen shows the subject in contempo-
but made numerous sketching trips around the Nether- rary dress, not the flamboyant quasi-historical garb
lands, as well as longer journeys to the Southern Neth- favored by Rembrandt and his followers. Echoing the
erlands, Gelderland, and the eastern border between modest, parochial nature of his painted views of the
Germany and the Netherlands. Although Van Goyen’s Dutch countryside, Van Goyen is depicted simply and
work was held in high esteem during his lifetime, his directly, without airs or pretensions.
swiftly brushed paintings routinely fetched only low Van Goyen’s open and lively expression is a distinct
prices. His prolific output may have raised his total departure from the cool, studied restraint that charac-
income, but unsuccessful speculations in real estate
and tulips meant that Van Goyen was frequently in
debt. In fact, in 1652 — just about the time Ter Borch
painted this portrait — an auction of paintings was held
in the artist’s home in order to satisfy his debts. Van
Goyen died in The Hague in 1656.1
Ter Borch’s modest half-length likeness presents
Van Goyen not as a painter, identified by palette and
brushes or other attributes of his craft, but rather —
somewhat disingenuously, under the circumstances —
as a respectable and successful burgher. He is soberly
dressed in a black doublet and cloak, accented with a
flat white collar and tasseled tie; a broad-brimmed black
hat rests squarely upon his head. The bulky pyramidal
mass of the figure, turned to the right but gazing
directly out at the viewer, with his elbow resting on a
balustrade just barely visible at lower right, is indebted
to Rembrandt’s etched Self-Portrait of 1639 (fig. 1), as
well as to the painted version created in the following
year (National Gallery, London, 672).2
The nonchalant elegance and perfect confidence
so eloquently expressed in these two self-portraits by
fig. 1
97
terizes so many of Ter Borch’s portraits. The dimen- 2. K
arel de Moor after
Gerard ter Borch, Jan
sions of the panel are drawn close around the figure,
van Goyen, etching,
bringing the subject closer to the picture plane and Rijksprentenkabinet,
enhancing the immediacy of the portrait.5 The obvious Amsterdam
warmth and informality of the likeness, as well, perhaps,

as the painting’s small format, suggested to Gudlaugs-
son that the Vaduz painting was not a formal commis-
sion, but rather a gift of personal friendship between
the two artists.6 Ter Borch probably painted the portrait
during a visit to The Hague in about 1652 and 1653.
Although the nature and extent of the relationship
between the two painters are not known, they may well
have met years earlier, when Ter Borch was a pupil of
the landscape painter Pieter Molijn in Haarlem in 1634.
Van Goyen had moved to The Hague in 1632, but is
known to have been in Haarlem working for the art
dealer Isaack van Ruysdael sometime during 1634. Van
Goyen, who like many seventeenth-century artists was
also active as an art dealer, may also have handled
works by Ter Borch either outright or on commission.7
Ter Borch’s portrait of Jan van Goyen is the only
fig. 2
securely documented likeness of the landscape painter.8
An etching made after the painting by the Leiden
painter Karel de Moor (1655 – 1738) bears the inscription
IOHANNES A GOYEN Natione Batavus / Genvinus Pic
tor Regionum (Jan van Goyen, born in the land of the
Batavians / painter of landscapes) (fig. 2). By 1699, the
painting had entered the collection of Michiel van
Musscher, a genre painter and portrait painter active in
Rotterdam and Amsterdam.9 De Moor probably saw
and copied the painting while it was in Van Musscher’s
collection. M E W
99
22 Portrait of a Gentleman
c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 28 × 23 (11 × 9 %)

Private collection
1. Govaert Flinck, Portrait The handsome subject in this sensitive portrait stares
of a Man, 1641, oil
directly at the viewer with a great sense of dignity and
on panel, The J. Paul
Getty Museum, bearing as he holds his wide-brimmed hat before him.
Los Angeles Stylistically, this well-preserved work must date from
the early 1650s. The shape of the gentleman’s collar and
tassels, and the cut of his hair are consistent with those
seen in dated portraits by other artists from this period.1
No female pendant is known for this work, and it seems
unlikely that one ever existed.
The identity of this formidable individual has,
unfortunately, been lost over the course of time, but he
was presumably a wealthy burgher from Amsterdam or
Haarlem, where Ter Borch apparently spent much of his
time during the 1640s and early 1650s. The probability
is strong that the subject hailed from Amsterdam. Not
only did Ter Borch have excellent contacts with the
higher echelons of Amsterdam society, including
Adriaen Pauw (cat. 8), but the subject’s pose and the
painting’s half-length format, with the figure placed
against a dark background, are also, although executed
fig. 1
at a smaller scale, consistent with Amsterdam portrait
traditions (fig. 1).
The present work has a delicacy of touch compa-
rable to that seen in Ter Borch’s portraits from the late
1640s of delegates who participated in the signing of the
Treaty of Münster. But the later work’s broadness of
touch and imposing presence are different in character
from those small-scale images. This evolution in the
master’s style, which is also evident in his portrait of
the painter Jan van Goyen from the early 1650s (cat. 21),
is also seen in his depictions of genre subjects. They, too,
begin to focus on half-length depictions of figures situ-
ated against dark backgrounds (cats. 19, 20). A K W
100
23 The Unwelcome Call
1653, oil on panel, 66.7 × 59.5 (26 @ × 23 *)

Although the Netherlands had to confront the specter came to know and appreciate a side of military life
of war throughout so much of its existence, Dutch where soldiers were forced to find emotional and physi-
painters paid surprisingly little attention to the drama cal solace far away from the comfort of home and family.
of armed conflict. Artists did paint large, formal group Here, in this dimly lit interior, Ter Borch depicted a
portraits of civic guards for the public halls of militia scenario that must have resonated with many soldiers
companies, but they seldom depicted actual battles. who had been called to serve in the eastern province of
With the exception of marine paintings, pictorial cel- Overijssel. A summons brought by an elegantly dressed
ebrations of heroism in victory or remembrances of trumpeter threatens to disrupt an intimate relationship
valor in defeat are virtually nonexistent. Those battle between a soldier and his beloved.2 Ter Borch master-
scenes that do exist mostly represent small-scale skir- fully suggested the narrative by placing the young cou-
mishes between marauders, where neither the purpose rier, hat still in hand, before an open doorway. The
nor the outcome of the strife is clear. During the 1630s “unwelcome call,” as the painting has been romantically
and 1640s Dutch artists also focused on the disruptive titled over the years, is fully understood by the two lov-
character of soldiers, most of whom were mercenaries, ers, who respond to the courier’s presence with a sad yet
as they drank, gambled, quarreled, and, worst of all, resigned acceptance of their imminent parting. Inevita-
assaulted innocent civilians. However, in the early bly, the officer will have to retrieve his sword, hanging
1650s — after the end of hostilities, signaled by the sign- from the bed behind them, and his gun and powder
ing of the Treaty of Münster — Ter Borch (and other horn, hanging on the wall, and return to active service.
artists such as Johannes Vermeer and Pieter de Hooch Ter Borch subtly expressed the powerful tension between
in Delft) began to depict a more genteel soldier. This the soldier’s military obligations and private concerns
type, when freed from military strictures, was shown that must have been played out in numerous encoun-
intermingling with friends and loved ones. ters of this nature.
Gerard ter Borch, however, was the only Dutch Ter Borch’s sensitivity to the psychological nuances
artist to view soldiers as individuals subject to the psy- of human relationships developed hand in hand with
chological realms of displacement and loneliness. Just his facility as a portraitist. Indeed, the model for the
how he came upon this awareness is not certain, but young woman at the officer’s knee was Gesina ter Borch
it may have stemmed from personal experiences in (cat. 16, fig. 1), who, as a poet and artist, expressed the
Zwolle and Deventer. Because the Dutch had been joys of love’s pleasures and the pain of its disappoint-
afraid that Spanish forces would attack from the east, ments.3 Gerard ter Borch explored these same concerns,
these two cities were strategically important, and many often using the vehicle of a love letter (see cat. 41) or a
soldiers were garrisoned there to protect that area. Dur- military summons to suggest profound changes in an
ing the winter months, soldiers who were relieved from individual’s state of emotion. Another element adding
active duty came into close contact with local citizens
in whose homes they were billeted.1 Thus, Ter Borch
102
to the painting’s emotional intrigue concerns the mor- Borch’s subtle allusions to the story of David and Uriah
ally ambiguous relationship of the soldier and young in this painting would not have been lost.6 In that bibli-
woman, for Ter Borch left it entirely unclear. Are the cal story (2 Sam. 11:6), David, desiring Bathsheba after
couple in this rustic domestic interior married or enjoy- having spied her at her bath, sent a messenger to sum-
ing an illicit affair?4 mon her husband Uriah to the front, where he was
Gerard, perhaps through Gesina, was intimately killed. In 1653, the year this painting was executed, the
aware of the writings of Jan Hermansz Krul, an Amster threat of war was far removed, but the underlying con-
dam poet, playwright, and songwriter who similarly cern that the call for public duty might well disrupt
explored the intricacies and complexities of love rela- one’s private existence must have continued to resonate
tionships. It seems probable that Gerard executed in Dutch society. A K W
this work for the intellectual circle attracted to Krul’s
writings.5 Within this intellectual circle, Gerard ter
104
24 The Grinder’s Family
c. 1653, oil on canvas, 73.5 × 60.8 (28 • × 23 •)

Staatliche Museen zu Berlin — Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
Gemäldegalerie
In this most unusual painting of a craftsman’s quarters, Gabriel Metsu’s Interior of a Smithy (c. 1657), which 1. Adriaen van Ostade,
The Knife Grinder,
a man sharpens a scythe on a large grindstone. His shows the close connection between grinding and the
c. 1653 – 1660, etching,
body stretches out along a cloth-covered plank; his blacksmith’s trade.4 Books of trades, wishing to ennoble Rijksprentenkabinet,
tense, muscular arms hold the blade against the turn- the occupations they feature, give the grinder his own Amsterdam
ing stone. A younger man in an apron leans against a shop.5 But none of these images, whatever their medium,
post to watch.1 More scythe blades and a hammer rest illustrates a grindstone as huge as the one depicted here,
on the bare ground to the left of the grindstone. A bro- nor one that is animal-powered. In Ter Borch’s painting,
ken chair, overturned pots, and other debris lie scat- the gear wheel that drives the grinding stone and the
tered about. In the foreground, a woman sitting on a mule that powers the wheel are both visible in the depths
low chair delouses the hair of a child, while a wide-eyed of the shed. These details, and the architecture of the
cat crouches on a stone block beside them. Rundown whole yard, are specific enough to suggest that Ter
buildings surround the figures, a shabby wooden shed Borch possibly observed an actual workplace in Zwolle.6
behind the grinder, a rough brick hut behind the woman Nevertheless, the picture is highly constructed and
and child. The panes in the leaded window above the its details are carefully selected. Some viewers have
mother’s head are broken. Yet in the distance is a well- looked to emblematic literature as an aid to interpreta-
maintained residence, its front gable decorated with tion, citing passages in the writings of Jacob Cats and
pinnacles and turrets and its roof constructed of slate, Adriaen van de Venne that locate multiple messages in
a material used primarily for houses of the prosperous the paradoxical qualities of the grindstone (dull in itself
in the eastern Dutch Republic.2 yet capable of whetting the edge of a blade).7 Others
In subject matter, this image has more in common
with the peasant paintings of Isaac van Ostade than
with the high-life interiors and military scenes for
which Ter Borch was known. It also includes far more
exterior architectural detail than is found elsewhere
in his oeuvre. Nevertheless, Ter Borch’s refusal to pin
down an unequivocal meaning in The Grinder’s Family
is wholly consistent with his usual approach. The scene’s
narrative ambiguities raise countless questions: What
significance should be attached to the contrast in activ-
ities according to gender? Why is a poor tradesman’s
dwelling set against a regent house? Why does the sup-
posed “main event” take place in the background?
In the print media, grinding figures quite promi-
nently in the repertory of representations of the trades;
in painting it appears less frequently. Most images
depict itinerants — no more elevated than peddlers —
who sharpen knives and scissors on the street by using
portable, treadle-powered grindstones (fig. 1).3 A per-
manent setup for a grinding stone can be found in
fig. 1
105
2. J ohannes van Cuylen have sought meanings in the stork’s nest on the peak
borch?, A Smithy in
of the house in the distance (perhaps symbolic of pros-
Zwolle, oil on canvas,
Bequest of John perity and protection), in the dilapidated architecture
Ringling, Collection and debris (signifying the transitory), and in the over-
of The John and Mable
Ringling Museum of all contrast between rich and poor (implying a moral
Art, the State Museum lesson).8
of Florida, Sarasota
It is telling in this regard that the paintings based
on Ter Borch’s Grinder’s Family, variously attributed to
the Zwolle artists Johannes van Cuylenborch and Jan
Grasdorp, make changes that clarify and simplify the
iconography of the original. The one in Sarasota (fig. 2)
transforms the house in the distance into a rustic two-
storey dwelling with a humble red-tiled roof overgrown
with vines. Towers added behind it are based on the
medieval fortifications of Zwolle, thus emphasizing the
local nature of the scene and suggesting the time-hon-
ored nature of the activity. The artist also brought the
workmen forward and eliminated the mother and child,
transforming the site into an unproblematically busy
work yard, whose mess simply signifies honest, virtuous
labor.9 He could not resist adding a touch of humor: the
confrontation between the foreground strutting cock
and the squawking chicken.
Ter Borch, however, refrained from including any-
thing sentimental, anecdotal, or idealizing, preferring
instead to record work straightforwardly and poverty
unapologetically. While showing both male physical
labor and female nurturance, he allowed the woman’s fig. 2
work in the foreground to upstage the man’s work far-

ther back. Yet he enclosed both under the long upward
sweep of the dominant roofline, which not only holds
the diverse areas of the composition together, but also
separates the zone of labor and relative impoverishment
from the zone of regent wealth. In order to strengthen
the theme of diligence, Ter Borch focused on various
kinds of looking. The grinder directs his gaze intently
on the task, the client or apprentice watches him prac-
tice that craft, the mother inspects her child’s hair, and
the cat stares unwaveringly out at the viewer. A M K
106
25 A Maid Milking a Cow in a Barn
c. 1653/1654, oil on panel, 47.5 × 50.2 (18 § × 19 #)

The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles
1. Gerard ter Borch, From early in his career Ter Borch associated himself
Farm Buildings and
with wealthy and dignified patrons, most notably the
a Hay-Barn outside
Zwolle, 1631 – 1633, Spanish nobility and Dutch representatives who con-
pen and brown ink, verged in Münster in 1648 for the signing of the treaty
Rijksprentenkabinet,
Amsterdam (land that marked the end of the Eighty Years’ War. Never-
scape sketchbook, theless, when he returned to Zwolle in the late 1640s
fol. 16)
after his travels to England, Spain, and the Southern
Netherlands, Ter Borch quickly reestablished his ties to
his family and fully embraced the diverse character of
the town in which he was born. While Zwolle was an
important trading center, it was, at essence, a rural,
agrarian community surrounded by fields and thatch-
roofed farmsteads. He had begun drawing these farms
even before he had left for a short stay in Amsterdam in
1632, and his interest remained with him until he left
for Haarlem in 1634. Although none of the drawings
from his landscape sketchbook records the interiors of
barns, he clearly walked around the farmsteads, record- fig. 1
ing them from different points of view, as though he
wanted to experience as fully as possible the peaceful cow facing the viewer, who peers inquisitively in the
ambiance of this country existence (fig. 1). maid’s direction out of the corner of its eye.
The most remarkable expression of Ter Borch’s Ter Borch’s sympathetic rendering of the scene
familiarity with rural life is to be found in A Maid is also evident in the careful way he depicted the farm
Milking a Cow in a Barn, which he probably executed implements, whether the overturned milk bucket on
in the early 1650s. This tender painting is the work of an the chopping block, the axe, earthenware brazier, grain
artist who felt an essential rapport with his subject and sieve, shoes, and brightly colored pillow on the ground,
was able to capture the quiet bond between the cow or the distant ladder and hayloft. As with his delicate
and the maid as she gathers its milk.1 It is a bond that rendering of the cows’ fur, these objects are depicted
Ter Borch suggested by the cow’s strict profile view, with great sensitivity. Each reflects Ter Borch’s clear
which conveys its patience and familiarity with the understanding of its shape, character, and function, as
milking process, and by the maid’s posture as she though he were as at home in this barn as the maid her-
squats close to the cow, seemingly leaning her head self. Ter Borch placed these objects discreetly at the
against the soft fur along its flank as she intently per- peripheries of the scene to enhance the rustic character
forms her task. Adding to the very personal character of the barn, but did not allow them to overlap the cows
of the scene is the slightly whimsical expression of the and the maid in ways that would distract from the cen-
tral focus of his scene. Furthermore, he subtly illumi-
nated the lower portion of this darkened interior and
108
used the reddish-orange accent on the maid’s dress to that makes this work so compelling.2 Unfortunately
draw the viewer’s attention to her activity. He then picked nothing is known about the circumstances underlying
up this tonality in the multicolored cushion, brazier, Ter Borch’s decision to paint this scene, whether, for
and wooden water bucket. He also used delicate touches example, he knew the owner of the farm or the maid
of orange and blue to enliven the surfaces of many of milking the cow. Interestingly, Ter Borch painted this
the objects, even the hoofs of the cow seen in profile. work on an oak panel with a rather roughly hewn verso,
As with Ter Borch’s genre scenes and portraits, it quite different in character from the types of panels
is difficult to cite a visual prototype that may have made in Haarlem or Amsterdam. He also painted this
inspired him to create this composition. Although a work with the oak grain running vertically, which is an
number of Dutch and Flemish artists — among them, unusual orientation for a horizontal composition.3
Aelbert Cuyp (1620 – 1691) and David Teniers II — AKW
depicted maids in cow stalls, none concentrated on the
milking process, and none established the type of mood
110
111
26 A Horse Stable
c. 1654, oil on panel, 45.3 × 53.5 (17 ¶ × 21 %)

The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles
In this carefully crafted but seemingly artless image, left, it floods the central part of the image, in particular
Ter Borch depicted the mistress of the house, identifi- the dappled white horse posed horizontally before the
able by her earring and gold necklace, opening a door whitewashed wall. But it also picks out the orange-red
into a stable where a man tends to a horse feeding from accents Ter Borch distributed around the painting,
a wooden trough.1 It is a hushed, even tender scene, notably those on the woman’s dress, man’s hat, and
without any dramatic focus or ostensible narrative bricks in the lower left. To help integrate the horse and
interplay, and seems to depict figures going about their figures into the stable setting Ter Borch softened the
daily routines in a setting as familiar to the artist as to room’s rectangular structure with diagonally placed
the protagonists he has portrayed. And yet this spare farm implements and the angled hayrack hanging from
painting has a mysteriously charged atmospheric qual- the ceiling. He also visually subdivided the room and
ity that differs from a purely descriptive rendering of provided a defined space for the horse and groom with
daily life. This effect comes from the sense of anticipa- a free-standing wooden post draped with the bridle and
tion and expectation resulting from the arrival of the the man’s jacket. A diagonally positioned pole propped
mistress, whose presence, neither remarked upon by against one of the boards enclosing the feed bin creates
the man intently grooming the horse nor explained by a temporary stall for the feeding and grooming. The
the artist, provides a human dynamic unprecedented woman is situated entirely within the darkened door-
in other depictions of stables in Dutch art. way to the right of the post. She stands behind the par-
The door in which the mistress stands and the well- tially opened door and the bucket on the floor, a posi-
maintained character of the stable, with its brick and tion that obscures portions of her body but allows the
stone floor, suggest that the stable was attached to the full impact of her steady gaze to activate the room.
living quarters, a type of farm structure (hallenhuis) The painting has often been seen as a pendant to
often found in Overijssel in the vicinity of Zwolle and A Maid Milking a Cow in a Barn, a work from the early-
Deventer. It is, in any event, an image that emphasizes to-mid 1650s that is similar in subject matter and picto-
the careful husbandry of farm animals, probably, in this rial character (cat. 25).3 However, because the dimen-
instance, a riding horse rather than workhorse. The sions of these works are not identical and the character
dappled horse, known as a schimmel or appelschimmel, of the panels on which they are painted is quite differ-
has been well brushed, with its mane and tail carefully ent, this proposal seems incorrect.4 Gudlaugsson has
tended so that the hairs have been pulled to the desired noted that the painting technique of A Horse Stable is
length. However, since he hid the horse’s muzzle from not only more refined than that in the other work, but it
view, Ter Borch seems to have used the stable as a set- also has a greater transparency in its atmospheric quali-
ting for a human encounter rather than for an animal’s ties, characteristics that developed in Ter Borch’s style
portrait.2 Indeed, as is so often the case in his work, Ter once he moved to Deventer in 1654.5 Such a date also
Borch has here created a work that belongs to no estab- seems to accord with the identity of the model who
lished iconographic tradition. posed for the mistress in this work: she was probably
The painting’s quiet yet psychologically charged Geertruyt Matthys, whom Ter Borch married in 1654.6
mood is enhanced by the unusual pale light coloring AKW
this windowless interior. Streaming in from the front
112
27 Gallant Conversation (known as Paternal Admonition)
c. 1654, oil on canvas, 71 × 73 (27 • × 28 #)

1. Gerard ter Borch, The Gallant Conversation — to use the Rijksmuseum’s ters present a tableau modeled directly upon Ter
Paternal Admonition, present title for the painting — is arguably the best- Borch’s painting: a father admonishes his daughter
1654 – 1655, oil on
canvas, Staatliche known image by Ter Borch. Certainly, it is the most while the mother looks down in embarrassed silence.
Museen zu Berlin — elusive in meaning. Ter Borch painted two versions By the mid-twentieth century, art historians no
Preussischer Kultur
besitz, Gemäldegalerie (probably one right after the other in 1654): first, this longer saw a commonplace domestic scene in the so-
Amsterdam canvas, then the narrower one now in Ber- called Paternal Admonition, finding instead a caution-
2. J. G. Wille, Instruc-
tion Paternelle, 1765,
lin (fig. 1). The title Paternal Admonition, by which both ary image. Ter Borch, they said, had depicted a high-
engraving, Rijks renderings have long been known, comes from an engrav class bordello, with the military officer a client, the
prentenkabinet,
Amsterdam
ing after the Berlin version executed by J. G. Wille in 1765 standing figure a courtesan, and the woman in the mid-
(fig. 2).1 In 1809 the German writer Goethe extended the dle a procuress.2 In support of this interpretation, they
image’s fame — and reinforced its misinterpretation — pointed to the bed and the still life on the table — a mir-
by citing it in his novel Elective Affinities. Goethe ror, powder puff, and combs associated with female
describes a game of charades in which several charac- vanity and a candle connoting easily enflamed love.
fig. 2
fig. 1
114
Some even suggested that the officer originally held a seated officer addresses, focuses on, and literally looks
coin in his hand, which had later been painted out by up to her.
a prudish owner. (The phantom coin theory has now Still, many seventeenth-century viewers would
definitively been refuted.)3 Other interpreters were have detected an essential ambiguity in Ter Borch’s
bothered by the disjunction of representing such a image, responding much as we do today to its provoca-
venal pursuit in so elegant and decorous a manner. tive overlap of hints of virtue and hints of vice. Perhaps
Surely Ter Borch’s approach here could not have been “vice” is more apparent in the Amsterdam version,
more different from his rendering of the sarcastically where the greater width of canvas allows space for a
titled Le Gallant Militaire, in which a crude officer does scruffy, slinking hound to hang around the officer’s
indeed thrust a handful of coins at a cornered prosti- chair, a disquieting departure from the groomed span-
tute (Kettering essay, fig. 8). Other art historians shifted iels in Ter Borch’s other interiors (cats. 20, 28 – 35). The
their attention to Ter Borch’s virtuoso description of broader format also directs more attention to the man,
satin, arguing that the painting functioned primarily whose proximity to the door marks him as an intruder
as a dazzling demonstration of surface effects. In doing in this feminine world, and whose blunt-toed shoe
so, they joined the many viewers over the centuries — invades the lady’s space. His military status alone adds
including notaries, artists, and critics — who regarded an ingredient of deliciously titillating risk to the scene.
Ter Borch’s satin as the sine qua non of his renderings In the narrower Berlin version, the viewer’s attention is
of women.4 drawn more readily to the lady. She becomes not only
Seventeenth-century courtship ritual has also been the officer’s focus but ours as well, concentrating our
offered as the painting’s organizing theme: the man is a thoughts on her reserve, her upright posture, and her
suitor, the lady in satin is the object of his affection, and brilliant attire, and therefore on the positive associa-
the woman in black is her chaperone.5 With such a nar- tions of each (fig. 1). Yet in both versions, messages are
rative in mind, the bed signifies prospective marriage mixed. We are never quite certain whether the woman
rather than bought love, and the lady’s upright stance demurely sipping her wine is there to prevent or to
and aloof bearing correspond with the reserved, con- facilitate a liaison. Should we notice the extravagant
trolled behavior that courtesy books urged for young, feathers in the officer’s hat or the loose angularity of his
unmarried women. In her poetry album of the early body language? With their numerous ambiguities, these
1650s, Gesina ter Borch included just such contained, two paintings deviate from and undercut the conven-
standing figures, seen from the back, in her illustrations tions of the usual high-life interior. More than most
for a number of Petrarchan poems featuring cold- contemporary genre scenes — including most others by
hearted beauties.6 It is possible that she and other Ter Borch — these encourage viewers to ponder a multi-
original viewers would have understood the Paternal tude of possibilities and to actively construct their
Admonition in light of such Petrarchan conceits. Fully meanings. A M K
consonant with this Petrarchan interpretation, the
lady is shown standing and self-absorbed, while the
116
117
28 A Boy Caring for His Dog
c. 1655, oil on canvas on panel, 35 × 27 (13 # × 10 £)

Alte Pinakothek, Munich
1. Michael Sweerts, With total concentration and loving concern, the young
Woman Searching for
student in this painting leans over his dog to search for
Lice, c. 1645 – 1650,
oil on canvas, Musée fleas in its fur.1 The spaniel, whose plaintive gaze is vis-
des Beaux-Arts, ible from under the boy’s arm, lies contentedly in its
Strasbourg
master’s lap. While the subject is not complicated and
certainly derives from actual experience, Ter Borch
created an image that is far from anecdotal.2 Indeed,
the psychological bond that he conveys between man
and animal is unique in Dutch art.
Toy spaniels are frequently seen in Dutch genre
scenes because, particularly after midcentury, the dogs
had become integral members of many Dutch families.
In other paintings by Ter Borch these pets are often
found in the presence of rich bourgeois women in ele-
gant interiors (see cats. 30, 34). Whether standing
attentively at the feet of their mistresses or lying con-
tentedly beside them, however, the spaniels in such
works are mere adjuncts to the broader composition
and not the focus of concern. The relationship between
this boy and dog seems particularly touching in a room
that is so barren, with furniture so rudimentary and fig. 1
with clothes so simple. Other than the youth’s blue

leggings, the colors are monochromatic browns and
ochres. cates he intended no negative commentary on the boy’s
Beyond representing an everyday event and a psy- neglect of his studies, which is implicit in the pen and
chological relationship between two friends, the subject book that sit idly on the table beside him. Given the
has broader moralizing resonances. The boy, for exam- presence of the boy’s hat in the immediate foreground,
ple, cares for his dog in much the same way that the he may well have just returned from school and turned
mother cares for her child in Michael Sweerts’ Woman his attention to his dog’s needs before commencing his
Searching for Lice (fig. 1), or in Ter Borch’s own memo- homework. Ter Borch, who often based his images on
rable painting from the early-to-mid 1650s (cat. 19).3 members of his immediate family, used his half brother
Careful grooming and nurturing were virtues often Moses as the model for the student.5 A K W
stressed in Dutch family life.4 In this instance Ter
Borch’s sympathetic portrayal of the boy’s concern indi-
118
29 Three Soldiers Making Merry
c. 1656, oil on panel, 63.3 × 47.9 (24 • × 18 ¢)

Private collection
1. Gerard ter Borch, In this delightfully playful painting, a seated officer continued to play an important role in communal life
Soldiers in an Inn,
with head thrust back downs a long and satisfying in this area of the Dutch Republic.1 However, the army
Victoria and Albert drink to the great pleasure of his two companions. He was much reduced in size after the signing of the
Museum, London is fully arrayed — with fashionable leather boots lined in Treaty of Münster and placed under civilian control
red, red sash, and metal breastplate — and his gaming, during the period without a stadholder after the death
smoking, and drinking have left him fully inebriated, a of the prince of Orange, Willem II, in 1650. Badly orga-
state evident not only in his body language but also by nized, it lacked a strong sense of leadership and pur-
his unbuttoned pants. The standing soldier, dressed in pose.2 As one author has described it, the army had
black with a gold-trimmed wine-red sash, stares down become “marginalized, demoralized, and politically
at the drinker with a bemused smile, while the elegantly emasculated.”3
dressed trumpeter joins in the revelry by blasting an Whether Ter Borch intended his painting to be
appreciative tribute to the drinker’s success at downing a critique of military preparedness is far from certain.
his drink in one draft. Only the drinker’s dog, with his Although the gold and white company flag attached
head affectionately and loyally resting on his master’s to the trumpet, with its insignia tassels draped over it,
leg, seems less than amused at the festivities. may have had express connotations to his contempo-
Although during the 1650s Ter Borch occasionally raries in Deventer, the painting’s subject conforms
depicted the foibles of soldiers idling away their time, in closely to earlier inn and guardroom scenes, including
no other work does he depict such an active and color- those created by Willem Duyster, Pieter Codde, and Ter
ful scene, filled with pleasures gained from each of the Borch in the 1630s and early 1640s (fig. 1). The pose of
five senses. Situated in a sumptuous domestic interior the seated drinker and the manner in which the smoker
near a large fireplace supported by elaborately carved
marble ionic columns, the officers almost seem to mock
the ideals of responsible military leadership by their self-
indulgent actions. The painting must have given little
comfort to those who felt that a strong and vigilant mil-
itary force was important for defending the Dutch
Republic from foreign intervention.
By the mid-1650s, when Ter Borch created this
work, such concerns would seem to have been rather
remote. The Treaty of Münster, marking the end of hos-
tilities with Spain, had been signed in 1648, and subse-
quent conflicts with England had been primarily mari-
time affairs, far removed from the purview of soldiers
garrisoned in Deventer and Zwolle. Nevertheless, polit-
ical unrest within the province of Overijssel persisted:
a threat poised from the east by the prince-bishop
Christoph Bernhard von Galen, who sought to advance
Catholic Counter-Reformation ideology along the
Dutch-German border, meant that military garrisons
fig. 1
120
2. D
avid Teniers II, holds his clay pipe as he looks down also resembles
Peasants in a Tavern,
figures found in David Teniers’ inn scenes, works that
National Gallery of Art, Ter Borch could have known from visits to Antwerp in
Washington, Gift of the mid-1630s (fig. 2) and to Brussels in the mid-1640s.4
Mr. and Mrs. John Ely
Pflieger, in honor of Thus, while the political unrest of the 1650s ensured
the 50th Anniversary that depictions of military figures remained a subject
of the National Gallery
of Art of interest, it would seem that Ter Borch’s underlying
motivation for depicting the subject had not essentially
changed since the 1640s. The primary difference
between Three Soldiers Making Merry and earlier
depictions of soldiers whiling away their time is Ter
Borch’s focused depiction of these three individuals, a
stylistic approach consistent with the artist’s other
genre scenes from the period.
The protagonists in this work are recognizable
from Ter Borch’s other genre scenes of the early-to-mid
1650s, particularly The Unwelcome Call (cat. 23). The
drinker’s costume and pose are comparable to those
fig. 2
of the soldier in that work, while the trumpeter is the
same young courier who has delivered the missive.
The trumpeter’s seated pose, with hat in lap, moreover,
resembles that of the male figure in the so-called Pater
nal Admonition (cat. 27).5 The setting is also familiar
from other works, including The Lute Player and Officer,
of about 1658, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.6 A
free adaptation of the scene by Caspar Netscher, signed
and dated 1658, is in the Philadelphia Museum of Art.7
AKW
122
30 The Suitor’s Visit
c. 1658, oil on canvas, 80 × 75 (31 ! × 29 ∞)

National Gallery of Art, Washington, Andrew W. Mellon Collection
The encounter taking place at the doorway of this ele- advised attachments.6 In this respect she followed in 1. Gesina ter Borch, Self-
Portrait of Gesina in a
gant, high-ceilinged room, decorated with gilded the path of her father: aside from his topographic draw-
Gray Cartouche, Crowned
leather wall covering, seems the height of gentility.1 ings, he was also a poet and in the 1620s helped illus- with the Ter Borch Arms,
A debonair young man, hat in hand, bows slightly as he trate an amorous songbook with images of lovers 1659, Rijksprenten
kabinet, Amsterdam
responds to the alluring gaze of the young woman who cavorting in the grass (see Wheelock essay). (poetry album, fol. 2r)
has come forward to greet him. She apparently has just It is against this background of family interest in
risen from the green velvet seat, where she had been art, music, and emblematic literature on love and its
playing a duet with the woman strumming on a theorbo: complexities that the nature of the narrative unfolding
her music book and bass viol can be seen lying on the in The Suitor’s Visit is most clearly seen. Under the
table. Behind the women stands a man who, in the dim- veneer of gentility is a scene alive with sexual innuendo.
ness of the interior light, warms himself before the The gazes of the couple at the door are at once enticing
hearth as he turns to peer at the visitor. and yearning, a private communication that does not
Ter Borch drew upon his surroundings in Deventer go unnoticed by the gentleman standing before the
in creating a sense of immediacy for his composition.
The objects in this work, including the tapestry on the
table, the chair, the theorbo, the hearth, and the leather
wall covering, were ones he well knew, as they reappear
in different contexts in a number of other paintings
from the mid-1650s.2 The model for the suitor was his
student Caspar Netscher, who also features in other of
Ter Borch’s paintings from the mid-to-late 1650s (see
cat. 31). Indeed, Netscher made a copy of this painting
before he set sail for Rome in 1659, a date that estab-
lishes a terminus ad quem for this work.3 Finally, the
elegant woman, standing resplendent in her red top
and white satin dress, is almost certainly Gesina, Ter
Borch’s beloved half sister (fig. 1). Not only did she fre-
quently serve as a model for the artist (see cat. 23), but
her ideas seem to have had a profound effect on the
type and character of the subjects Ter Borch chose to
depict during this phase of his career.4
By the mid-1650s Gesina had embarked on her own
artistic and literary career with her poetry album, which
is filled with arcadian images of love’s pleasures and
disappointments.5 Gesina’s poetry and pictorial images
in this and other albums belong to that important
Dutch literary genre, largely influenced by Petrarchan
ideals, that both celebrates the delights of love and
warns against the dangers of becoming ensnared in ill-
fig. 1
123
2. J an Krul, “De Over hearth. More explicitly sexual, however, is the nature en Doet Geen Baet” (roughly, The Excess that brings
daed en Doet Geen
of their gestures. The young woman clasps her hands no profit). The thrust of the emblem is a warning that
Baet” (The Excess
that brings no profit), in a manner that could be construed as an invitation for encouragement by a woman is not always to be trusted.
from Eerlycke Tytkort- intercourse, as the thumb of her right hand protrudes Whereas a suitor might feel that love and commitment
ing (Haarlem, 1634),
National Gallery of Art between the index finger and second finger of her other would follow, all too often the lover is rejected and then
Library, Washington hand in a most unconventional, and expressive, manner. belittled. Krul writes of the lover’s lament: “If you never
His gesture in response appears to be an assent, for as intend to have me, why so much courtship? / It would
he bows he forms a circle between the thumb and index honor you best to send me straight away.”8 The similari-
figure of his left hand. ties between the painting and the print seem to imply
Ter Borch does not spell out the outcome of the that the outcome of this match will likewise be disap-
woman’s ploy — for her central position in the composi- pointment. Finally, not unrelated to the painting’s
tion and the dog’s inquisitive gaze clearly indicate she is mood are the colors of the woman’s dress. In the list
the initiator of the intrigue. Undoubtedly, however, Ter of color symbols Gesina compiled in her poetry album
Borch’s circle of acquaintances would have recognized about 1659, white is equated with purity and carnation
that his composition had remarkable parallels with with revenge or cruelty.9
an image found in Jan Hermansz Krul’s influential The subtlety of Ter Borch’s narrative is matched by
Eerlycke Tytkorting (Honorable Pastimes), published the gracefulness of his figures and the delicacy and
in Haarlem in 1634, which contains emblems devoted refinement of his touch. No artist could convey as effec-
to the delights and travails of love.7 The related print tively as he the shimmering surface of a long white satin
(fig. 2) accompanies an emblem entitled “De Overdaed skirt or the undulating rhythms of a translucent lace
cuff. His brushstrokes, while small, are quite loose and
rapidly applied with the result that the surface has a
richly animated quality.10 Such an effect is also felt
in the subtle psychological interactions he created
amongst his figures. Ter Borch’s effectiveness in depict-
ing human emotion and a sense of inner life in such
genre scenes may stem from his experiences as a por-
trait painter. Even the poses he used in these works are
occasionally similar. For example, the manner in which
the suitor holds his wide-brimmed hat is derived from a
portrait the artist created in 1656.11 A K W
fig. 2
124
31 Officer Dictating a Letter While a Trumpeter Waits
c. 1658/1659, oil on canvas, 74.5 × 51 (29 & × 20 %)

Ter Borch’s several depictions of letter-writing officers which commonly functioned as a romantic symbol
are, as Kettering has observed, largely unprecedented.1 (see cat. 32).3
Certainly, there are images of officers reading or receiv- To the right of the scene, a military trumpeter
ing letters or dispatches — compare, for example, gazes out at the viewer as he waits to collect the com-
Anthonie Palamedesz’ Guardroom with Officer Receiv pleted missive. He wears a rich blue jerkin trimmed
ing a Letter (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, Braun with bold black and yellow braid, a buff leather jacket,
schweig) or Officer Reading a Letter (Wallraf-Richartz and tall leather boots fitted with spurs. At his left hip,
Museum, Cologne). Both works date to the 1640s, a sword hangs from a broad bandolier; behind his back
but they are transactions conducted wholly within a is his trumpet, suspended from the braided cord slung
masculine-military sphere. In contrast, Ter Borch’s let- diagonally across his chest. Characteristic of Ter
ter writers are engaged in a passive, thoughtful activity Borch’s attention to quotidian detail, the trim at the
that in visual tradition was almost exclusively the prov- hem of the trumpeter’s jerkin is worn and frayed where
ince of women. The domestic settings of these pictures his sword has rubbed against it.
(a well-to-do urban home as opposed to a guardroom) The trumpeter’s flamboyant costume, a vestige of
and carefully chosen attributes confirm that these are medieval livery, made him an immediately recognizable
not military briefs but love letters that are so earnestly character. In the seventeenth century, the military
being crafted. The officer himself is no rough warrior, trumpeter served with the cavalry, sounding orders on
but a romantic, a gallant; the gaily clad trumpeter com- the battlefield and acting as a courier; though not an
mands attention not so much as a harbinger of military officer, he earned more money and greater respect than
action (compare cat. 23), but as Cupid’s proxy, tolerant the average soldier.4 He enjoyed diplomatic immunity
and wryly bemused. and was generally not armed — the swords worn by
Hunched over a cloth-covered table, the young sol- trumpeters in paintings by Ter Borch and others were
dier in the Officer Dictating a Letter pauses in the midst more a gentlemanly accessory than a weapon. Like the
of writing. His careless perch, widely planted feet, and ensign or standard-bearer in civic militia companies,
forward-leaning posture, even the helmet he seems to the trumpeter was a swashbuckling figure, the quintes-
have forgotten to remove, convey a mix of energy and sential soldier-courtier. He shuttled news and messages
pragmatism. Seated across the table, a second man, between military and civilian worlds; he delivered ulti-
wearing a dark hat and a metal breastplate over his gar- matums and negotiated surrenders with discretion and
ments, appears to be dictating to his younger colleague.2 tact. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the
Strewn across the surface of the table are an inkwell, a trumpeter became such a pivotal figure in paintings
leather penholder, and a clay pipe. An engaging brown centering on the exchange of amorous messages. The
and white spaniel is sprawled in front of the table, progress of love required no less a strategic battle plan
bright eyes alertly trained on the viewer. Painted out than did wars waged between armies; letters carried by
by the artist but still faintly visible on the floor near
the dog’s hind legs is a playing card, the ace of hearts,
126
this steadfast messenger helped negotiate the fragile sly allusion to the occupying forces camped out on
advances and retreats of the heart’s campaigns.5 love’s battleground.7
Ter Borch situates his letter writer in a comfortable The model for the dark-haired officer dictating the
domestic environment, probably a well-to-do home that letter to his eager young colleague was Ter Borch’s
has been commandeered for military use. The pavilion pupil Caspar Netscher. Netscher was working in Ter
bed in the background, with its circular frame sus- Borch’s studio from at least 1655 (the date on a signed
pended from a rafter overhead, may have been a stan- copy of Ter Borch’s Paternal Admonition, Schloss-
dard domestic furnishing,6 but it also has obvious museum, Gotha) until about 1658 or early 1659, thus
visual parallels with military tents erected on the battle providing an approximate date for the present picture.
field. This conceit functions not only as a reminder of MEW
the transient nature of the soldier’s billet, but also as a
128
32 Officer Writing a Letter
c. 1658/1659, oil on canvas, 56.8 × 43.8 (21 £ × 18 •)

Philadelphia Museum of Art, The William L. Elkins Collection, 1924
With knees and feet spread wide, a young officer sits at group of paintings all in a vertical format, with a simple
a table covered with a garnet cloth. He wears a doublet table forming both the focal point of the composition
with ribbed gilt-embroidered sleeves beneath a metal and a unifying motif for human interaction.4 Both com-
cuirass, square-toed shoes, and wide canons (overstock- positions revolve around a seated and a standing figure;
ings) folded over his knees. His broad-brimmed and the palettes are neutral, with the tablecloth and the gar-
feather-bedecked hat rests on the table at his side. To ments of the standing figure providing complementary
the left, a trumpeter waits patiently, hat in his hands, jolts of bold primary colors. The domestic environ-
dressed in his signature blue jerkin over a buff leather ments are quite similar (indeed the mantels and hearths
jacket and tall boots. His trumpet hangs at his back in the two pictures appear identical), but individual
from a braided cord; the tip of his sword is visible at details throughout the compositions construct a subtle
his heel. The figures’ costumes are virtually identical contrast between the rugged, peripatetic life of the sol-
to those worn by the young soldier and the messenger dier and the predictable, settled calm of the feminine
in Ter Borch’s Officer Dictating a Letter While a Trum domestic realm. The trumpeter, for example, was a fig-
peter Waits (cat. 31), as well as in other paintings by the ure of action, hastening messages over great distances
artist with related themes.1 and performing urgent missions; as his direct counter-
Tossed deliberately on the floor in the foreground part in Woman Sealing a Letter, the maid executed
of the scene is a playing card, the ace of hearts. With its small, routine errands along a route that probably var-
implications of romantic love (see cat. 31), the card sug- ied little over the course of weeks or even years. The
gests that the officer is writing “from the heart”; this sleek hound sniffing at the hem of the trumpeter’s jer-
assumption finds sweet confirmation in the touch of kin is alert, wiry, and poised for a run; the lady’s plump
red discreetly reflected in the soldier’s gleaming armor, lapdog slumbers comfortably at her feet.5 Furnishings
just above his heart. The recipient of the officer’s heart- in Woman Sealing a Letter connote cozy stability: a
felt missive is almost certainly the woman shown pre- massive bed, a hefty silver candlestick, and a large ink-
paring her own letter for delivery in Woman Sealing a stand. In Officer Writing a Letter, on the other hand,
Letter (cat. 33). Peter Sutton was the first to propose these same elements have a distinctly transient flavor:
the two paintings as pendants exploring a romantic the round pavilion bed, with its connotations of the
exchange of letters between a man and a woman.2 Ter military tent, dangles from a single cord and writing
Borch produced several paintings on the theme of offi- implements consist of a small portable inkwell and pen
cers writing or reading letters during the mid-to-late case.6 The adoption of an urban domestic interior as
1650s (including cats. 23, 31), but this work is evidently the setting for a military theme suggests that this is
the only one to have a pendant. a private home that has been commandeered for the
Although Sutton’s proposed pairing has not found officer’s use.
unqualified acceptance,3 countless formal and thematic Ter Borch also deliberately manipulated poses and
parallels link the present picture with its putative mate. gestures to contrast an active, externally oriented mas-
Gudlaugsson situated both pictures within a larger culine realm with its more self-contained feminine
counterpart. The officer faces viewers directly as he
writes and the trumpeter casts a sidelong glance view-
ers’ way as he waits to be dispatched, but the woman
129
1. Gabriel Metsu,
Man Writing a Letter,
c. 1662 – 1665, oil on
panel, National Gal
lery of Ireland, Dublin
2. Gabriel Metsu, Woman

Reading a Letter with a
Maidservant, c. 1662 –
1665, oil on panel,
National Gallery of
Ireland, Dublin
fig. 1 fig. 2
and her maid are turned inward toward each other: therefore (as Sutton has proposed), that Ter Borch’s
imminent communication with the outside world does pendant paintings are the first to link a man and a
not disrupt this private moment. woman through a shared letter theme, predating
Because the model for the officer in this painting Gabriel Metsu’s eloquent pendants of a man writing
(as well as in the London Officer Dictating a Letter, and a woman reading a letter, which are dated to about
cat. 31) was Ter Borch’s pupil Caspar Netscher, the 1662 and 1665 (figs. 1, 2).7 M E W
painting must predate Netscher’s departure from Ter
Borch’s studio in 1658 or early 1659. It would seem,
130
33 Woman Sealing a Letter
c. 1659, oil on canvas, 56.5 × 43.8 (22 @ × 17 @)

Private collection, New York
1. Johannes Vermeer, Seated at a table covered with a vibrant blue cloth, a with its knotted fringe crosshatched into the wet paint.
Lady Writing a Letter
young woman warms a stick of sealing wax in the flame A particularly intriguing detail in the scene is the
with Her Maid, c. 1670,
oil on canvas, National of a candle, putting the final touch on the letter she has small red-bound book lying on the table. As Sutton has
Gallery of Ireland, just written. On the table before her are all the neces- noted, the book is approximately the same size and
Dublin
sary accoutrements of letter writing: a metal inkstand shape as Jean Puget de la Serre’s popular letter writing
with a quill pen laid in the tray, a piece of paper, a small manual, Le Sécretaire à la Mode, first published in 1630
red book, and what appears to be a stamp or seal to and translated into Dutch in 1651 as De Fatsoenlicke
mark the wax. The young writer is fashionably dressed zend-brief schryver.3 The book offered letter-writing
in a lush eggplant-colored velvet jak trimmed with advice and eloquent exemplars to cover nearly every
white fur, and a mouse-colored silk skirt; a white ker- conceivable social situation, with about one-fifth of the
chief covers her hair. Her maid is more plainly clothed text devoted to love letters. In this section, model let-
in a gray bodice, white chemise, and a black overskirt ters professing varying degrees of love and devotion
drawn up to reveal a bold red skirt; her close-fitting (usually written by men) were each followed by a range
black cap is held in place by a metal armature. With of possible responses: from outright refusal to polite
metal marketing pail looped over her arm, she waits demurral, from coy encouragement to, in the author’s
patiently to collect her mistress’ letter. By placing the words, “other more obliging answers.” Ter Borch offered
candle’s flame at the precise center of a composition no hint as to what this young woman might have writ-
distinguished by simple geometry and the calm delib- ten on the paper now carefully folded shut, but her calm
eration of its figures, Ter Borch endowed the mundane
act of sealing a letter with an almost sacramental dignity.1
Many of the props in this scene appear in other
paintings from the late 1650s and 1660s: the table, with
the distinctively mismatched repair to one of its
stretchers; the canopy bed, the hearth, the silver can-
dlestick, the inkwell, even the spaniel sleeping devot-
edly by his mistress’ feet.2 With great sensitivity and
ingenuity, Ter Borch was able to create fresh and varied
environments from a rather limited repertoire of studio
props: his recycling of motifs is never overt or burden-
some, but instead works to enhance the “plausible fic-
tion” of his genre compositions. He took obvious plea-
sure as well in rendering the specific properties of each
familiar object and in exploring the interplay of tex-
tures and surfaces. The dull gleam of the marketing pail
is carefully distinguished from the shimmering silver
candlestick and the bright sparkle of the maid’s hair
wire; the plush velvet, soft fur, and lustrous silk of her
mistress’ garments are precisely rendered and far
removed from the coarser fabric of the bed hangings,
fig. 1
132
demeanor suggests that she might have found a satis- in a fit of frustration.5 Whichever description fits the
factory model by consulting the manual before her. paper on the floor, it seems clear that unlike Ter Borch’s
Ter Borch’s Woman Sealing a Letter may have resolute protagonist, Vermeer’s letter writer has not
inspired Johannes Vermeer’s Lady Writing a Letter met with unalloyed success in composing her letter.
with Her Maid, painted in about 1670 (fig. 1).4 But small Sutton has convincingly proposed the Woman
details disrupt the apparent serenity of Vermeer’s scene Sealing a Letter as the pendant to the Officer Writing
and set it apart from Ter Borch’s ceremonial, almost a Letter in Philadelphia (see cat. 32).6 The link between
iconic interpretation of a kindred subject. The woman’s the two works had long been unrecognized, in part
forward-leaning pose conveys urgency and psychologi- because the dimensions of the present painting were
cal intensity; on the floor in the foreground are a stick inaccurately recorded; it had also been erroneously
of sealing wax, a red wax seal, and a crumpled paper attributed to Gabriel Metsu by both Smith and Hof
object that has been identified as either a letter (one stede de Groot.7 M E W
received and cast aside, or a discarded draft) or a small
book, perhaps a letter writing manual thrown down
134
34 A Lady at Her Toilet
c. 1660, oil on canvas, 76.2 × 59.7 (30 × 23 !)

The Detroit Institute of Arts, Founders Society Purchase, Eleanor Clay
Ford Fund, General Membership Fund, Endowment Income Fund and
Special Activities Fund
No Dutch artist captured as did Ter Borch the elegance imagination to become fully engaged in fulfilling 1. Pieter Cornelisz Hooft,
“Van branden blinct
and grace of wealthy burghers, nor did any express the story.2
hy” (By burning
with such subtlety those moments of psychological Ter Borch did not reveal the specific circumstances he glows), from
uncertainty that attend even individuals of such stature. for the young woman’s concerns, but her anxieties are Emblemata Amatoria,
1611, in Werken
Both of these aspects of Ter Borch’s genius are com- those well known to anyone who has felt the pangs of (Amsterdam, 1671),
bined in A Lady at Her Toilet, one of the artist’s most uncertainty in love. The pictorial elements related to National Gallery of Art
Library, Washington
refined, yet provocative masterpieces. love in this work include not only the ring on the young
In this painting Ter Borch depicted an unguarded woman’s finger, but also the tentlike bed in the back-
moment in the life of an elegant young woman, who ground (see also cat. 32). The prominently placed dou-
stands in the midst of a sumptuous domestic interior, ble candlestick would seem to have particular signifi-
complete with an imposing marble fireplace. Behind cance in this work. Snuffed-out candles are objects
her is a table covered by an ornate Oriental-style rug, fraught with emblematic meanings in Dutch art, often
on which are an oval brush box, a gilded candlestick suggesting the transience of worldly existence.3 Much
with two snuffed-out candles, and a mirror surrounded as with the mirror, another object generally associated
by an elaborately carved gold frame.1 As the woman’s with transience, Ter Borch would seem to have included
maid bends to adjust her white satin dress and a young these pictorial elements here to enlarge upon the anxi-
page expectantly offers her a richly decorated ewer, eties affecting the woman’s state of mind.4 In emblem-
probably containing perfumed water, the young woman atic literature, burning candles were equated with a
glances absentmindedly to the side and fingers the ring true heart and conquering love (fig. 1). In this instance,
on her left hand. Her expression, while difficult to read,
is certainly not one of reverie or joy. It has a tinge of
uncertainty, even worry, which is even more apparent
in the reflected image of her face, which fills the mirror
on the table.
Although her elegant, low-cut dress with blue
top, white satin skirt, and shimmering golden shawl
were probably meant to be worn at a special occasion,
it is not certain if the woman is getting dressed or
undressed, if she is preparing for the evening or reflect-
ing upon it. For all of the image’s sensual beauty, from
the young woman’s attractive appearance to the young
page’s resplendent wardrobe, questions about the quiet,
understated human drama unfolding in the privacy of
this woman’s domestic quarters are equally compelling.
Although Ter Borch conveyed the woman’s emotional
fragility with the subtlest of gesture and expression, he
left the narrative open-ended, allowing each viewer’s
fig. 1
135
their snuffed-out character would seem to allude to Ter Borch apparently executed this work about the
love’s passing, engendered, perhaps, by uncertainties same time (c. 1660) that he was working on Curiosity
caused by a lover’s absence. Finally, not unrelated to the (cat. 35) and shortly after painting The Suitor’s Visit
mood of the painting are the colors of the woman’s (cat. 30). These scenes are comparable, not only in the
dress. In the list of color symbols included in Gesina’s sensual character, but also in the accoutrements,
poetry album in about 1659, white is equated with among them the fireplace in Curiosity and the richly
purity and blue with jealousy.5 ornamented carpet on the table in The Suitor’s Visit.8
As much as Ter Borch’s contemporaries admired Most tellingly, Ter Borch replicated exactly in this work
the artist’s exquisite renderings of materials, they must the white satin dress of the standing woman in The
have enjoyed pondering the human situations he Suitor’s Visit. While Ter Borch must have used a trans-
depicted in such works. Unfortunately, documents yield fer drawing to repeat the dress’ pattern, including its
little information about how contemporary viewers folds and creases, the delicacy of his brushwork creates
responded to the scenarios depicted in Ter Borch’s the illusion that he painted the satin from life. A K W
genre scenes.6 It is not even certain where the artist sold
such works, although it would seem probable that his
primary market for genre scenes was Amsterdam.7
137
35 Curiosity
c. 1660, oil on canvas, 76.2 × 62.2 (30 × 24 !)

The Jules Bache Collection, 1949
1. Gerard ter Borch, Like the Paternal Admonition (cat. 27), this painting
The Letter, c. 1661,
has an anecdotal title, Curiosity, which it probably
oil on canvas, The
Royal Collection, acquired several centuries ago.1 In this case, the title
Her Majesty Queen makes no misleading interpretative claims. It refers
Elizabeth II
simply to the curiosity of the lively young lady at the
back who leans over for a glimpse of the letter being
written by the seated woman. The presence on the table
of a second letter, with a broken seal, indicates that the
writer is penning a response. Sharing the narrative
interest, even dominating it, is a full-length figure in
light-colored satin who stands at the left holding a
handkerchief. Although her stately posture and out-
ward turn are reminiscent of portraiture, this is no
portrait, for Ter Borch’s actual sitters preferred formal
black (see cats. 6, 38, 43, 51). Jenneken ter Borch, the
artist’s half sister, quite likely modeled for the standing
lady, while the “curious” woman at the back can be
identified with certainty: Gesina ter Borch, another half
sister whom Ter Borch used as a model in quite a num-
ber of his canvases (cats. 16, 17, 30, 35, 36).
The painting belongs to an important group of
works from the 1650s and early 1660s presenting scenes
of love and courtship (cats. 27, 30, 34, 36). Each of these
scenes features a beautifully dressed lady of marriage-
able age standing in a self-contained posture and
bathed in light from an unknown source.2 The Letter
(fig. 1), another prominent example, shares several fur- fig. 1
ther elements of content and composition with Curios
ity, though in that case Gesina modeled for the stand- would more likely have hung in a church than in a
ing lady. All the paintings in this group depict members domestic interior.3 The standing lady’s satin dress vigor-
of a highborn society accustomed to well-appointed ously joins in the fiction, capturing the viewer with its
settings. But the props Ter Borch used are as fictional bravura technique while deflecting attention from the
as his narratives. In Curiosity a chandelier gleams in the act of letter writing. As the dress surely enlivens the
darkness at the back and an elaborate fireplace frames visual impact of the composition, it also serves to com-
the standing lady. In actuality, the fireplace was prob- plicate the central narrative.
ably modeled on one in the Deventer town hall — in A generation ago interpretation began with the
other words, in a public space. Similarly, the chandelier identification of objects supposed to be laden with
moral meanings. The candlestick and watch on the
table signified transience; the warming stool on the
138
floor suggested impassioned love or perhaps comfort.4 writing.5 Curiosity is one of several Ter Borch works
Today Ter Borch is thought to have paid relatively little showing women receiving letters from — or writing
attention to the moralizing significance of such ele- letters to — unseen males (cat. 33). Unusual in this
ments. He conveyed his meanings primarily through painting, however, is the lack of a clear visual connec-
delicate nuances of character, tight compositional tion between the most “eligible” female and the letter
structures, and dazzling surface treatments (the velvet being written. Ter Borch seems deliberately to have left
table covering, the satin and soft skin of the standing the narrative ambiguous and open-ended, intriguing
lady, the writer’s fur jacket, and the lacy neck covering and inspiring viewers to puzzle through the possible
of the third figure). His interests lay in the direction of story lines, the subtle relationships among the three
psychology and social conduct. women, and their contrasting psychological states.
While Ter Borch found a literary framework for AMK
these themes in Petrarchism, the conventional language
of love in European poetry, here he seems equally alert
to the actual contemporary enthusiasm for epistolary
140
36 The Introduction (An Officer Making His Bow to a Lady)
c. 1662, oil on canvas, 76 × 68 (29 • × 26 #)

Polesden Lacey, The McEwan Collection, The National Trust
Commanding attention in this work is the striking lady greeting, a figural motif seen in contemporary court- 1. Gesina ter Borch,
Gentleman Bowing to
in a white satin gown. She is a figure frequently encoun- ship images. In her poetry album of the early 1650s,
Kiss a Lady’s Hand, 1656,
tered in Ter Borch’s paintings of the 1650s and early Gesina ter Borch (the model here) included a number of brush in black and
1660s (see cats. 16, 17, 27, 30, 34, 35), several of which vignettes derived from songbook illustrations in which various colors, Rijks
prentenkabinet,
show the same model wearing the same dress. Here she suitors bow or kneel before their ladyloves (figs. 1, 2). Amsterdam (poetry
poses with her arms delicately arching outward. Her The Petrarchan content of such songs and poems might album, fol. 97r)
form, brightly lit from the front, makes an elegant well provide a clue to the Polesden Lacey work: an aloof
silhouette against the darker background. An officer and controlled beauty is approached by an ever-so-
clad in a gleaming ceremonial breastplate and spurs slightly obsequious suitor.3
approaches her with a bow of greeting. Although the Yet the scene is infused with a subtle hint of appre-
lady allows him to touch her hand, her upright posture hension. Strategically positioned between the officer
and averted gaze express a cool reserve. At the left, and the young lady, the older woman at the back seems
behind the lady, a lutenist accompanies a singer who to exhibit some concern about their meeting. One
appears to be momentarily distracted by the visitor. cause for her wariness could be the gentleman’s mili-
Also in the background, leaning over a chair, an older tary status. In seventeenth-century art and literature,
woman turns her hood-enshrouded head to get a better soldiers, even officers, enjoyed an equivocal reputation.4
look at the officer. The narrative is played out in a well- Although this officer’s manners and body language sep-
appointed interior, rendered warm by the ruddy tones arate him from the typical soldier in contemporary
of the striped wall hanging at the rear, the red velvet of Dutch art — including those in Ter Borch’s own tavern
the chair at the right, and the glowing wood of the lute. paintings (see Kettering essay, fig. 7) — he does bring
Gudlaugsson interpreted this scene as a pair
engaged in dancing.1 Implicitly, he thus connected it
to the Netherlandish pictorial tradition of dancing
figures — peasants or aristocrats — extending back to
fifteenth- and sixteenth-century moralizing prints. In
the first half of the seventeenth century, artists such as
David Vinckboons, Frans and Dirck Hals, and Pieter
Codde developed the tradition further in their merry
company paintings and prints, which feature couples
accompanied by musicians either in gardens of love or
in interiors (see Kettering essay, fig. 5). These painters
devised a specific vocabulary of gestures and features
of dress to indicate dance movements — for example,
the upward sweep of a lady’s skirt or the exaggerated
stance of a gentleman executing a particular step.2 The
actions of this Ter Borch pair, however, resemble such
gestures far less than they resemble those of ceremonial
fig. 1
141
armor and spurs into a world of music and satin. View- 2. J an van de Velde,
Gentleman Greeting a
ers might very well have enjoyed the element of risk that
Lady, from Jan Jansz
this glamorous officer inserts into the refined environ- Starter, Friesche Lusthof
ment. Some might even have responded to the ways Ter (Amsterdam, 1621)
Borch’s discreet high-life interior deviated from (yet

subtly invoked) earlier merry companies in the Prodigal
Son tradition, with their conventional old lady pro-
curesses among the music makers. A M K
fig. 2
143
37 Portrait of a Young Man
c. 1663, oil on canvas, 67.3 × 54.3 (26 ! × 21 ™)

This young man’s voluminous silhouette — with bulky be termed deferential. Yet to modern eyes, the extraor-
garments completely masking the forms of his body — dinary specificity of his fashionable costume (clearly
represents the very height of French-inspired fashion in a source of considerable pride for the wearer) detracts
the first half of the 1660s. Beneath a full, short cloak he from the formality of the portrait by locating it within
wears an abbreviated doublet, called an innocent (with a very narrowly defined time and place.4 Ensuring the
the deliberate connotation of “simpleton”), on account viability of a painted portrait for future generations was
of its rather foolish appearance.1 Partly unbuttoned, it and is of paramount concern to the portrait painter. To
ends well above the waist to reveal a blousy chemise. circumvent the possibility that the vagaries of passing
His wide petticoat breeches, known as rhinegraves, are fashion would make the subject appear ludicrous a
trimmed at the hem with ribbon loops, bands of ribbon decade hence, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century
or lace, and ruffles, and at the waist with a small apron theorists strongly advocated the use of pastoral, histori-
of ribbon loops. Below his breeches, the man wears cal, or “Roman” dress in portraiture, or at the very least
wide canons (overstockings), gathered in with garters “mixing the Fashion with what is Painter-like.”5 This
just below his knees to create a deep ruffle. Still more trend is epitomized by the romantic “undress” made
ribbons generously adorn both his square-toed shoes popular in portraits by Anthony van Dyck and swiftly
and his tall, conical hat (not to mention his sleeves). adopted by portrait painters across Europe.
Lying lightly over his shoulders is a falling band trimmed For all of its virtues, the notion of “timeless” cos-
with a gossamer lace border. Ter Borch enlivened this tume in portraiture did not find universal favor. An
expanse of black garments with glittering accents (note English traveler writing at the close of the century com-
the gleaming shoes) and with his characteristic talent mented, “I appeal whether it is not better and much
for rendering the properties of each bit of fabric, ribbon, more pleasing to see the old fashion of a dead friend,
and lace. or relation, or a man of distinction, painted as he was,
The astonishing display of masculine finery con- than a foppish nightgown, and odd quoiffure, which
tained in this modestly scaled portrait utterly and irre- never belonged to the person painted.”6 The more accu-
vocably refutes the commonly held notion that the rate the record of external appearance, the more effec-
black garments so prevalent in seventeenth-century tively like the portrait was. Although the identity of this
Dutch portraits were a reflection of protestant sobriety.2 man is not known, Ter Borch’s meticulously painted
In the seventeenth century, black costume was the pre- record vividly conveys an individual personality. The
ferred formal dress of the court and nobility in the basic format (full-length, near frontal, in an understated
United Provinces and throughout fashionable Europe; setting) and his dignified bearing suggest that he was a
although the color was muted, fabrics were sumptuous member of Deventer’s elite ruling class. But his wonder-
and the trimmings, lavish. In contemporary portraiture, fully over-the-top costume adds an unexpected fillip to
black costume was viewed not only as a sign of the sub- the sober black and white that was virtually de rigueur
ject’s wealth and social status, but the image itself took in formal portraits, indicating, perhaps, a man just a bit
on some of the formal, ceremonial qualities associated more flamboyant, extravagant, or vain than his moder-
with the garments.3 ate, eminently proper neighbors (compare cat. 42). No
Fixing the viewer with his direct gaze, the man in less extraordinary clothing was affected by the woman,
this portrait strikes a commanding pose; the effect is presumably the man’s wife, depicted in the pendant
heightened by an understated setting that might almost (cat. 38). M E W
144
38 Portrait of a Young Woman
c. 1663, oil on canvas, 63.3 × 52.7 (24 • × 20 #)

The Cleveland Museum of Art, The Elisabeth Severance
Prentiss Collection
1. Gerard ter Borch, The young woman immortalized in this portrait is is depicted at full length and turned three-quarters to
Catrina Leunink, c. 1662 –
sumptuously clad in the most elaborate feminine attire the left, dressed in a black gown over a light-colored
1663, oil on canvas,
The State Hermitage Ter Borch ever depicted. Although her identity has underskirt, with a sheer lace-trimmed kerchief; her left
Museum, Saint unfortunately been lost, she was very likely a member hand is curled into the folds of her skirt and her right
Petersburg
of one of Deventer’s wealthy regent families. Her black holds either a fold of fabric or a fan. Gudlaugsson pro-
satin dress is trimmed with wide bands of black lace; posed Catrina Leunink, which he dated to about 1662
the skirt is gathered up at the right side and draped over or 1663, as the first in this series (fig. 1).2 Leunink (1635 –
her arm to reveal an underskirt of white satin trimmed 1680) was the wife of Jan van Suchtelen, a burgomaster
with bands of silver embroidery. Her rigidly structured in Deventer. Other closely related compositions include
bodice, designed to elegantly elongate the torso by Ter Borch’s portrait of Maria Wedeus van Suchtelen
lengthening the waistline and pushing the breasts high, (1641/1642 – 1730), the wife of Jan’s younger brother
was the height of fashion during the 1660s. In addition Gerhard van Suchtelen, painted in about 1666 (fig. 2);3
to whalebone stays, a thin piece of ivory, wood, or iron, and his portrait of Freda Quadacker, wife of Gosewijn
called a busk or planchette,1 was often inserted to keep Hogers, professor of history and rhetoric at the Deventer
the front portion of the bodice (the stomacher) com- Athenaeum, painted from about 1664 to 1665.4 Although
pletely rigid. The stomacher depicted here is unusually the women’s garments vary in degree of elaboration
decorative, densely worked with loops of silver ribbon.
The sleeves of the subject’s bodice are trimmed with
silver ribbon at shoulder and cuff, and slit to reveal the
full sleeves of her chemise. A sheer kerchief, folded
around her shoulders, is trimmed with a deep lace
border. Her hair is arranged in ringlets over her ears,
beneath bows of gauzy ribbon. She wears jet earrings
and a matching brooch, a pearl necklace, and rings on
each of her pinkies.
Ter Borch astutely tempered this extravagant sar-
torial display by restricting the palette to near mono-
chrome (black and white with silver accents) and adopt-
ing the understated setting common to virtually all the
portraits painted during his Deventer period (compare
cats. 42, 43). A red velvet armchair and a table covered
by a velvet cloth edged in gold fringe are the only fur-
nishings in the otherwise neutral, unarticulated space;
the simple forms balance, rather than compete with,
the decorative figure.
For all of its exceptional detail, the painting shares
its basic compositional format with a number of other
portraits of young women Ter Borch painted during the
early-to-mid 1660s. In each of these works, the subject
fig. 1
146
2. G
erard ter Borch, and the settings range from the starkly cavernous
Maria Wedeus van
(Leunink) to the fairly elaborate (Wedeus), as a group
Suchtelen, c. 1666, oil
on canvas, Corcoran the likenesses admirably convey the homogeneous
Gallery of Art, Wash “image” of well-bred prosperity and virtuous modesty
ington, D.C., William
A. Clark Collection so desired by Deventer’s elite (see cats. 42, 43).5
Despite a discrepancy in dimensions (about 4 cen-
timeters in height and 1.5 centimeters in width), this
painting is almost certainly the pendant to the Portrait
of a Young Man in the National Gallery, London (cat.
37). The relative placement of the figure within the
space indicates that the Cleveland canvas has probably
been reduced at the top. Gudlaugsson, based on his
analysis of the subjects’ costumes, suggested that the
Portrait of a Young Woman may have been painted
somewhat later than its pendant.6 M E W
fig. 2
148
39 Glass of Lemonade
c. 1663/1664, oil on canvas, 67.2 × 54 (26 * × 21 @)

The State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg
40 Glass of Lemonade
Attributed to Gerard ter Borch

c. 1664, oil on canvas, 67 × 54 (26 ™ × 21 @)
Collection Pieter C.W.M. Dreesmann, London
In this quietly seductive scene, two young lovers raptly of human affairs. Lemons, however, also had medicinal 1. Dirck van Baburen,
The Procuress, 1622,
gaze into each other’s eyes with expressions filled with qualities that were widely recognized, and it is this
oil on canvas, Museum
longing and desire while an older woman, resting her aspect of the fruit that underlies Ter Borch’s pictorial of Fine Arts, Boston,
hand on the girl’s shoulder, hovers protectively over concerns. One seventeenth-century book on gardening M. Theresa B. Hopkins
Fund
them. Together the girl and her male admirer hold a recounts the virtues of oranges and lemons, “known to
glass of lemonade, she by its stem and he by cupping his most people by experience,” as being “good to warm a
hand under it in such a manner that he is also able to cold Stomach, to resist all Foulnesses, to help stiffened
touch her little finger. With his other hand he gently Sinews, to dispel Aguish Colds, and to cure the Scurvy.”3
stirs the lemon rind through the liquid, spreading its More specifically, lemons were seen as an effective
tangy flavor through the water and releasing its sweet dietary cure for lovesickness, both male and female.
and pleasant odor into the air between them. Adding to Lemon slices or partially peeled lemons appear in
the sensual imagery is the background bedstead, whose numerous depictions of lovesick maidens, who are gen-
partially opened curtains reveal an unmade bed.
This highly charged image has generally been
viewed as a bordello scene, one that falls within the tra-
dition of procuress scenes that flourished in Dutch art
during the first half of the seventeenth century.1 Indeed,
Ter Borch may well have played upon that tradition
when conceiving this work, for the juxtaposition of the
older woman with the couple is entirely consistent with
the compositional arrangements favored by artists like
Dirck van Baburen in the 1620s (fig. 1). Nevertheless,
this image is entirely different in character from such
procuress scenes: it has a gentleness and a mutual
yearning in the figures’ expressions that suggest Ter
Borch built this work upon another premise.
The young man’s act of stirring a lemon rind in a
glass filled with liquid is unique in Dutch art, although
orange or lemon rinds draped over a glass of white wine
are occasionally found in Dutch still-life paintings. Not
only did artists delight in contrasting the differing tex-
tures, but lemons were also used to sweeten and temper
wine.2 In this respect they often served symbolically to
indicate the importance of temperance in the conduct
fig. 1
149
39
40
2. J an Steen, Lovesickness,
Alte Pinakothek,
Munich
3. A . Romanets after
Gerard ter Borch,
A Glass of Lemonade,
from Basan 1771
fig. 2
fig. 3
erally seen languishing in a room, often seated before veil tied around her head, conveys her weak state, as
a bed and attended by her nurse and a doctor.4 In one does her need to steady her right arm with her left
such painting the lover, the cause of the young woman’s hand.7 Her cure, however, will come less from the
misery, is seen arriving at the door (fig. 2). The young lemon concoction she is about to drink than from the
woman’s joy at being near her beloved is further sug- presence of the young gallant, whose tender gaze Ter
gested by the yellow fur-lined jacket she wears; yellow, Borch subtly emphasized in the play of light and dark
according to Gesina’s list of color symbols, represented modeling his face.
gladness or joy.5 The actors in this domestic drama were well known
Ter Borch’s composition, while unique in bringing to Ter Borch, who, to judge from the style of the cos-
the two lovers together, belongs entirely to the tradition tumes, must have painted this work in the early-to-mid
of the lovesick maiden. Although the girl sits erectly, 1660s.8 The young girl is his half sister Gesina, who fre-
she is carefully supported by her caring nurse as she quently modeled for his paintings, and the young gal-
gazes into her lover’s eyes.6 Her pale complexion, which lant is Moses, his half brother (see cat. 28).9 The old
Ter Borch accentuated by contrasting it with the black woman, recognizable from drawings by Moses, may
depict Wiesken Matthys, the mother of both Gesina
and Moses.10
152
The Hermitage painting was expanded at an early it is difficult to imagine that the artists who reputedly
date, in any event probably before it entered the Hasse- studied with the master in Deventer — among them,
laer collection. Its measurements at the sale of this col- Pieter van Anraadt and Roelof Koets — would have been
lection in 1742 were 81.7 by 72 centimeters.11 The paint- capable of successfully emulating his style.12 Perhaps
ing was engraved by A. Romanets (fig. 3) before the the explanation for the high quality of some of the cop-
additions were removed when the painting was in the ies of Ter Borch’s paintings lies within the workings of
duc de Choiseul collection at the end of the eighteenth the art market. If Ter Borch sold his genre paintings
century. Remnants of the painted additions are still through art dealers in Amsterdam, as seems quite likely,
found on the original support, including the chair in it is possible that those very dealers hired trained artists
the lower left and the monkey’s ball and chain in the to make replicas for an interested clientele. For example,
lower right. Eglon van der Neer and Michiel van Musscher could
A second version of the Glass of Lemonade (cat. 40) well have made their copies of Ter Borch’s paintings in
not only preserves the original composition, but also such a fashion.13
reveals that the Hermitage painting was cut at the left If any second version were to be considered an
when the additions were removed. Beyond confirming “authentic” replica by the master, this one would surely
the original appearance of the Hermitage painting, qualify. The painting exhibits no indication of another
however, the extremely high quality of this second ver- artist’s intervention, whether conscious or unconscious.
sion raises fascinating questions about workshop prac- While the handling of paint is slightly smoother than in
tice. It is evident that Ter Borch, utilizing methods the Hermitage version, and certain forms, such as the
taught by his father, replicated specific motifs, such man’s right cuff, are somewhat simplified, the expres-
as satin dresses, from one composition to another (see sions of the faces, the subtle nuances of brushwork in
cats. 30, 34 and 47, 48). Did he also paint exact replicas the young woman’s satin dress, and the chiaroscuro
of entire compositions? And did he approach composi- effects modeling the figures are comparable. Small
tional replicas as he approached replicas of specific changes in composition are also evident in a number
motifs (painting them himself) or did he have members of areas. Hopefully, by including this work in the exhi-
of his workshop execute them? No documentation sur- bition, in the context of the Hermitage painting and
vives to provide guidance in this matter; therefore, other similar compositions from the 1660s, a fuller
judgments must be made primarily through stylistic determination of the attribution of this version can be
comparisons. made, which, in turn, may help answer questions about
Gudlaugsson attributed only a few of the many comparable versions of Ter Borch’s paintings. A K W
extant compositional replicas of Ter Borch’s paintings
to the master, even though many of them are quite
good. With the exception of Caspar Netscher (who
studied with Ter Borch from about 1654 to 1658 or 1659),
153
41 Lady Drinking While Holding a Letter
c. 1665, oil on canvas, 38.3 × 34 (15 % × 13 ™)

Sinebrychoff Art Museum, Finnish National Gallery, Helsinki
1. Gerard ter Borch, In a quiet corner of a room set off by a blue folding
A Girl in a Country
screen, an elegantly dressed young woman sips a glass
Costume, c. 1650, oil on
panel, Rijksmuseum, of wine while holding the letter she has just read in her
Amsterdam other hand. The message could not have been positive,
for her wistful, distant expression is that of a young
woman beset by the uncertainties and disappointments
of love. In hopes that some good wine would brighten
her spirits and drive away melancholy, as promised in
an old drinking song often sung by rederijkers, she has
filled her glass with wine from the earthenware pitcher
on the table.1 In her solitude, however, the effort seems
misguided; also worrisome is her ability to drink in the
moderate levels that that very song recommends.
Gesina ter Borch, the model for the woman portrayed
in this painting, knew this song well, for in the early-to-
mid 1650s she transcribed it in her poetry album, add-
ing below it a two-line poem of her own, based on
Ecclesiastes: “Pure sweet wine refreshes the human
heart / when it is tastily enjoyed in moderation.”2
The sentiments seem so real in this painting that it
is tempting to see this work as a reflection of personal fig. 1
experiences encountered in the Ter Borch family, par-

ticularly by Gesina. In the late 1650s and early 1660s in portraying either a woman’s air of expectation at the
Gesina had a close, loving relationship with Henrik arrival of a letter or her subsequent reaction to the writ-
Jordis, an Amsterdam merchant and amateur poet. ten word. For example, in his portrayal of a young peas-
This relationship apparently ended about 1662. Although ant girl reflecting on the contents of a letter (fig. 1), the
nothing is known about the reasons for their change in emotional consequences are evident in the figure’s
circumstances, moments such as the one depicted in dejected posture and expression. A far more positive
this painting might well have occurred and been pain- response to a letter is found in A Lady Reading a Letter
fully remembered. (fig. 2), where Gesina, as model, eagerly pores over the
Letters were extremely valued in seventeenth- words in the note she holds in her two hands. While her
century Dutch society, largely because communication emotional reaction to the letter is entirely different than
with distant loved ones was almost exclusively con- that in Lady Drinking While Holding a Letter, she sits in
veyed through such means. While women and men of front of an identical room screen at a table partially
all ages must have received all manner of mail, Dutch covered by the same carpet.
artists focused their concerns on young women’s reac-
tions to love letters. Ter Borch, in particular, delighted
154
2. G
erard ter Borch,
A Lady Reading a Letter,
Wallace Collection,
London
3. G
erard ter Borch,
Woman Drinking Wine
with a Sleeping Soldier,
c. 1658 – 1659, oil on
canvas, Private
collection
fig. 3
fig. 2
During the eighteenth century Lady Drinking intended the paintings as pendants, or whether they
While Holding a Letter was considered to be a pendant were joined together by a later collector has been a
to Woman Drinking Wine with a Sleeping Soldier (fig. 3), matter of some dispute, in part because the paintings
a work of identical dimensions that depicts a similarly appear to date some years apart.4 Nevertheless, the
attired woman imbibing from a glass of wine.3 In the paintings’ compositional, thematic, and stylistic con-
latter instance, however, the cause of her desire to nections make a pairing by Ter Borch most plausible.
refresh her heart with savory wine was not a disap- AKW
pointing letter but the ineffectual performance of her
soldier companion, who has fallen asleep from the
intoxicating effects of tobacco. Whether Ter Borch
156
157
42 Jan van Duren
c. 1666/1667, oil on canvas, 81.5 × 65.5 (32 % × 25 ¶)

Robert Lehman Collection, 1975
1. The Town Council of A member of the regent class of Deventer, Jan van Ter Borch developed a market for this portrait type
Deventer (detail of Jan
Duren (1613 – 1687) was exactly the sort of patron who soon after his move to Deventer in 1654. About sixty
van Duren in cat. 44)
found Ter Borch’s novel approach to portraiture examples have survived, all probably produced for local
appealing. Van Duren entered public service early. viewing (see cats. 37, 38). These small-scale renderings
From 1638 to 1643 he represented his local ward, the of subjects standing full length amid spare settings dif-
Waterstraat, on the town’s gezworen gemeente (common fer markedly from the portraits by his contemporaries
council; literally, sworn community). In 1644, Van in the western cities. In Holland, artists such as Bar-
Duren’s position in the ruling oligarchy was strength- tholomeus van der Helst executed robust, life-size, half-
ened by his election to a far more elevated administra- length works, while Nicolaes Maes and others favored a
tive body, the town council (magistraat), on which he graceful, Van Dyckian manner. The stately formality of
served until 1673.1 In fact, his likeness in the portrait Ter Borch’s Deventer portraits also differs from the rel-
here is repeated in Ter Borch’s 1667 Town Council of atively lively pictorial language of his own earlier por-
Deventer (fig. 1). The council consisted of twelve traiture (for example, cats. 5, 6). In his depiction of Van
schepenen (aldermen) and four raden (legal advisors or Duren, Ter Borch allows the subject — or the subject
judges), assisted by four secretaries. Because of his allows himself — ribbons on his shoes, on his petticoat
seniority on the council, Van Duren sits in a privileged breeches, and on his hat.5 The fine textures of his dou-
position at the back, just to the right of the central sec- blet and breeches contrast with his cape’s velvet lining.
tion of paneling, directly next to the presiding burgo- But Ter Borch tempered such luxury by numerous for-
masters.2 Whether Van Duren divided his time mal devices. Van Duren stands in quiet dignity, self-
between his administrative duties and a profession or contained. The contours of his form are closed and
occupation is not known, though some members of the set against an unarticulated background. The mono-
Deventer patriciate did continue with mercantile activi- chrome tonality of the picture is disturbed only by his
ties.3 More certain is that he belonged to a group whose white collar and cuffs, his brown leather soles, and the
firm grip on power only increased throughout the cen- muted red of the tablecloth. Here, as in all the Deventer
tury. Many members were Ter Borch’s clients for single- portraits, Ter Borch left no doubt as to the subject’s
figure portraits.4 status. The full-length format connotes aristocracy; the
rich attire denotes wealth. But the size of the image and
the restraint, even severity, of the treatment seem per-
fectly calibrated to suggest republican virtue and civic
modesty — the ideology of this citizen elite.
A striking uniformity extended across this group
of sixty or more works, allowing Deventer viewers to
recognize an affiliation among this elite caste not only
in the repetition of formal elements from one portrait
to the next but also in the very fact of posing for Ter
Borch. In a time of factional strife and declining civic
prosperity, Ter Borch showed the leading figures of
Deventer as they most wished to be seen: wealthy, confi-
dent, virtuous as individuals and unified as a class. A M K
fig. 1
158
43 Margaretha van Haexbergen, Wife of Jan van Duren
c. 1666/1667, oil on canvas, 81.3 × 65.1 (32 × 25 £)

Robert Lehman Collection, 1975
Although many of Ter Borch’s images of male regents

very likely hung alone, many others were paired with
images of their wives. These full-length female portraits,
matching the males in scale and sobriety, confirm the
impression that Ter Borch produced a serial group por-
trait of an entire caste. Intermarriage was one of the
principal means by which the Deventer regent families
held on to power. The wedding on 23 July 1637 of Jan
van Duren and Margaretha van Haexbergen (1614 –
1676) was typical in this respect. Margaretha was the
daughter of Hendrik van Haexbergen, a secretary of
Deventer’s town council, and Eva Nilant, another mem-
ber of a prominent local family. Some thirty years later
fig. 1 fig. 2
the couple sat for Ter Borch, who was related by mar-
riage to Margaretha’s sister. The Van Durens produced
at least one child, Damiaan (born 1651). He inherited mula for both Marienburgh and Haexbergen, portray- 1. Gerard ter Borch,
Willem Marienburgh,
this pair of portraits from his parents.1 ing them with identical body language and even the
c. 1663 – 1664, oil
Ter Borch presented Margaretha, who was about same chair. on canvas, National
fifty-three years old when she posed for him, as a stolid Van Duren and his wife very likely ordered elabo- Gallery, Prague
member of society. Although she stands beside a red rately carved wooden frames for their portraits. This 2. Gerard ter Borch,
velvet chair with plenty of gold braid, Margaretha her- supposition is based on the frames still extant for the Gertruid Marienburgh,
c. 1663 – 1664, oil
self is dressed even more sedately than her husband. Marienburgh pendants, attributed to the local Deventer on canvas, National
Her only decoration consists of the black braid on her sculptor Derck Daniels.3 (Daniels also executed the Gallery, Prague
dress, her white double collar and cuffs, and her jewelry. frame for The Town Council of Deventer, cat. 44.) Framed
Such matronly restraint contrasts with the elegance in this way, the Deventer portraits would have presented
allowed a much younger regent lady, Gertruid Marien- their restrained pictorial rhetoric inside an extravagantly
burgh, who was still in her late teens when she (and her showy encasement. Might that have been another means
husband) posed for the artist a few years before (figs. 1, of reconciling the sitters’ middle-class sensibility with
2).2 For Marienburgh, Ter Borch included up-to-date their wealth and status? A M K
costume accessories appropriate only for a younger
woman: a shimmering, embroidered satin underskirt,
flounced sleeves, and a fancy lowered collar that set
off her neck and flowing hair (see also cat. 38). Never-
theless, Ter Borch used the same general portrait for-
159
44 The Town Council of Deventer
1667, oil on canvas, 186.2 × 248 (73 & × 97 £)

Town Hall, City of Deventer
Nearly twenty years separate Ter Borch’s first group council’s meeting hall, served to remind them all of
portrait, the 1648 Swearing of the Oath of Ratification of where the real power lay.6
the Treaty of Münster (cat. 13), from his second and last, Despite depicting the town council in their reno-
The Town Council of Deventer of 1667. Again his subject vated chamber, Ter Borch’s rendering puts little empha-
was highly unusual — a representation of a municipal sis upon Daniels’ new paneling. The background is
council. Seventeenth-century Dutch artists painted mostly muted and its details left sketchy, offering mini-
many group portraits, especially militia companies and mal distraction from the twenty portrait heads.7 Ter
regents of trade and charitable organizations, but rarely Borch took other liberties as well, linked both with the
did they portray civic governing bodies.1 Ter Borch’s painting’s eventual placement and with the magistraat’s
painting here includes the sixteen councilors who con- political ideology. He flattened the space of the room,
stituted the Deventer magistraat sitting in a dignified eliminated the windows along the northeast wall, and
row along three walls of their council chamber. Seven directed the light unnaturalistically from the front (as
sit to the left, seven to the right of the two chairmen he did in most of his genre paintings). The councilors
(the councilors with the greatest seniority), who are form a long horizontal frieze, which the two senior
positioned behind a raised table in the center.2 In the members and the four secretaries counter with a strong
foreground, four secretaries gather around another central axis. This strictly symmetrical construction
table; one of the secretaries stands, having removed his conformed to the way great national assemblies were
hat, and hands the chairmen an official document.3 The sometimes rendered in historical prints.8 Centered on
names of all the individuals serving in 1667 are known. the wall behind the figures, a Last Judgment is flanked
Several had earlier posed for individual portraits by Ter by two boards on which medieval executioners’ swords
Borch (see cat. 42).4 are mounted, signifying the magistraat’s function as a
This commission likely was connected with the judiciary as well as a legislature. The Town Council
renovation of the municipal complex during the 1650s betrays no hint of the political divisions that were ram-
and 1660s, when Deventer enjoyed a temporary period pant within the group.9 On the contrary, the tight unity
of revitalization. In 1662, the well-known Amsterdam of the figural ensemble suggests a council utterly united
architect Philips Vingboons redesigned the wing in purpose. And the solemnity, old-fashioned hierati-
adjoining the principal town hall building, and in 1665 cism, and high artificiality of the image suggest the
new paneling, the work of the gifted local woodcarver political legitimacy, indeed the moral rightness, of this
Derck Daniels, was installed in the main building’s coun formidable company of men.
cil chamber. While Ter Borch portrayed the magistraat The custom-made frame by Derck Daniels ampli-
in their own chamber, the finished work actually hung fies the already impressive physical dimensions of the
above the fireplace in the Great Hall of the Vingboons work and adds to its meaning (fig. 1). An Eye of Justice
wing, where the forty-eight members of the gezworen crowns the frame, bracketed by measuring sticks
gemeente (common council) met several times each around which curl symmetrical cornucopias. Vegeta-
year.5 Ter Borch was himself appointed to this lower, tion and manufactured objects spill out to either
advisory body (see cat. 45) the year before he executed side — symbols of plenty and prosperity, but also of
the upper body’s group portrait. Perhaps his image of
the magistraat, hung prominently in the common
162
1. Derck Daniels, details
of frame, from top and
left side
fig. 1, top
punishment. Particularly graphic are the scourge, man-

acle, handcuffs, and padlock, together connoting the
strict justice required for freedom and peace to prevail.10
While Daniels’ interweaving of emblematic and other
symbolic motifs differs strikingly from Ter Borch’s pic-
torial language, painting and frame present a unified
message about the policies, values, and responsibilities
of the council.
If the considerable sum Ter Borch received for this
work is any indication of the sitters’ response, they held
the painting in high regard.11 It has continued to hang
in a prominent position in the civic complex down to
this day. But a little over a decade after its completion,
smoke from the Great Hall fireplace caused so much
damage that the aged Ter Borch was hired to repair it.
At that time, he replaced the darkened strip that runs
along the bottom of the canvas.12 The painting suffered
further damage in later centuries, notably in the relin-
ing process and subsequent retouching.13 Nevertheless,
the treatment undertaken in 2003 and 2004 shows that
much more of the original painting has survived intact,
especially in still-life details and the all-important faces
of the councilors. A M K
fig. 1, lef t
164
45 Self-Portrait
c. 1668, oil on canvas, 62.7 × 43.7 (24 § × 17 ^)

Ter Borch’s oeuvre contains three self-portraits. At the fers from those of the Deventer patricians mainly in 1. The Swearing of the
beginning of his career, he inserted himself into the the way his cloak shrouds most features of his physical
crowd of witnesses at the left in The Swearing of the form and hides most elements of his attire. His arms (detail of cat. 13)
Oath of Ratification of the Treaty of Münster (fig. 1). held akimbo underneath the cloak force it outward on
2. Gerard ter Borch,
Late in life, he painted a small self-portrait on copper both sides. Its length covers his breeches entirely.2 The Self-Portrait, c. 1676,
(fig. 2), consistent with his long interest in portrait min- plainness of the resulting shape compensates for the oil on copper, Gemälde
galerie, Staatliche
iatures (see cats. 8 – 12).1 And at the height of his powers, expressions of fashion he did permit himself — exuber- Museen zu Berlin
in about 1668, he created this impressive Self-Portrait, ant ribbons garnish his stylishly pointed shoes; an elab-
one of the few standing self-portraits executed by any orately worked, bib-fronted band of lace decorates his
seventeenth-century Dutch artist. Indeed, this image neck. (X-rays indicate that he probably painted this
carries no overt reference to Ter Borch’s vocation. It fancy lace over an earlier, unadorned collar. At about
suggests instead his strong identification with the the same time, circa 1670, he seems to have removed a
Deventer elite, for the work corresponds closely with hat and added fullness to the wig.) Rather marvelously,
the portraits he executed for his patrician clientele in Ter Borch here created an image that managed to under
the 1650s and 1660s (cats. 37, 38, 42, 43). In addition to cut his status as an artist by completely hiding his
its full-length format and small size, it shares with them hands. Yet, he succeeded in making his claim to patri-
the same formality, reticence, and representational cian status precisely on the basis of its similarities with
scheme: a single figure poses in a spare setting under his contemporary artistic work.
even light. Ter Borch’s appointment to the gezworen gemeente
Like his patrician sitters, Ter Borch stands com- (common council), forty-eight prominent men of
posed and aloof, sober of countenance. His image dif- Deventer who advised the town council, may have stim-
fig. 1 fig. 2
165
ulated him to execute this stately self-portrait. In 1666 his portraits of other Deventer women of the regent
he joined the body as the representative of the Enge class.3 Unfortunately one of the early owners of both
straat ward. Two years later he was officially granted paintings — Johan van der Marck, who specialized in
full citizenship. Certainly this painting signaled Ter collecting portraits of artists — not only cut down Ter
Borch’s integration into the Deventer regent class. And, Borch’s portrait on four sides but also decided to sell
like so many Deventer regents, he wanted his portrait the image of the artist’s wife, which is now lost. When
to be accompanied by a pendant of his wife. Accord- the two pendants were new and whole, however, they
ingly he produced a full-length representation of Geer- would have looked like nothing less than the latest
truyt Matthys in the same dimensions as his self-por- additions to Ter Borch’s “serial group portrait” of the
trait. It was probably executed in the same year and Deventer elite. And so they were. A M K
likewise presented a single, standing figure. Ter Borch
showed his wife carrying a fan, a familiar attribute in
167
46 Posthumous Portrait of Moses ter Borch
Gerard ter Borch and Gesina ter Borch

c. 1668, oil on canvas, 77.5 × 58.5 (30 ! × 23 %)
1. Gesina ter Borch, Gerard painted this work jointly with his half sister wide bandolier slung over one shoulder, aristocratic
Moses on the Beach near
Gesina. It is their only known collaboration and her walking stick, lace cravat, and full, flounced, ribbon-
Harwich, late 1660s,
brush in black and only extant work in oil. Documents indicate that decorated sleeves. His stiff posture is softened only
various colors, Rijks Gesina received some training in oil painting, probably slightly by the placement of one slender leg in front of
prentenkabinet,
Amsterdam, (scrap from Gerard.1 But she devoted most of her time to the other. Both in the watercolor and in the oil painting,
book, fol. 83r) watercolor, the medium she used for illustrating books, the figure conforms to standards of dignified, gentle-
including her kunstboek (scrapbook). The latter con- manly decorum while it still exhibits the virility appro-
tains a section devoted to the memory of her brother priate to a military man. If such features show Gesina’s
Moses — Gerard’s half brother — who died in battle off hand in this collaboration, others can be attributed to
the coast of England.2 Although Moses had shown great Gerard. The format — an upright, cabinet-sized por-
talent as a draftsman in his youth, he volunteered for trayal of a full-length standing figure — was favored by
the Dutch navy in about 1664 and joined the fight Gerard in these years (cats. 37, 38, 42, 43). Filling the oil
against the English in the Second English-Dutch War.3 painting (but not the watercolor), the figure is strongly
In the summer of 1667 he took part in an attack on a lit against a relatively dark ground. Gerard’s handling of
fort near Harwich, an operation that proved successful paint is also immediately apparent in the head of Moses,
except for the loss of a few men, Moses among them. where the skin, features, and hair show his delicate,
One of Gesina’s watercolors for her scrapbook shows subtle touch (cat. 48). Perhaps Gerard also painted the
her brother on the beach near Harwich, surrounded by hands, armor, hourglass, and greyhound. Gesina cer-
references to his passing (fig. 1). The date inscribed at tainly executed the rest: the lace and other details of
the lower right indicates Moses’ death rather than the clothing, the spaniel, the remaining allegorical attri-
year of execution. butes, and the landscape. Her use of oil paint in these
The Posthumous Portrait of Moses ter Borch in oil areas bears all the characteristics of her approach in
steps right off the page of Gesina’s scrapbook. Moses is watercolor — dry, thick, and linear.
dressed identically: long buff coat tied with a silk sash, Gesina likely took responsibility for the icono-
graphical program as well, surrounding the iconic cen-
tral figure with an array of objects, each laden with
obvious, direct symbolism. (Gerard, a master of the
rhetoric of simplicity, preferred a non-allegorical
approach to commemorative portraiture.) Here Gesina
accumulated attributes as if she were amassing eulogies
to her beloved younger brother. Clusters of separate
still lifes encircle Moses, combining biographical refer-
ences with common vanitas emblems. Military sym-
bols include a ceremonial helmet, armor, and gun.
Shells hint at the naval engagement. Watch, flute, hour-
glass, skull, bone, butterfly, and snake all connote tran-
sience and an untimely death. Cyclamen suggests sor-
row; a thistle, constancy; and ivy, eternal life.4 The two
dogs surely represent fidelity (but also signify his social
fig. 1
168
2. H
endrik Goltzius, status). Interestingly, these same dogs appear elsewhere
Willem of Orange, 1581,
in Gesina’s work.
engraving, Rijks
prentenkabinet, Allegory in portraiture, particularly in the medium
Amsterdam of oil painting, was most often the prerogative of roy-
alty and the aristocracy.5 In the medium of prints, by
contrast, small-scale, emblematic engravings did some-
times celebrate military prowess in just this manner
(fig. 2). Such visual images must have informed Gesina’s
emblematic way of thinking and seeing.
After its execution, the posthumous portrait of
Moses stayed in the Ter Borch family alongside other
memorabilia.6 Sometime in the nineteenth century,
however, it found its way to a New York private collec-
tion, from which it was eventually deeded to the New
York Historical Society.7 Auctioned in 1995, the painting
was purchased by the Rijksmuseum and thus rejoined
the Ter Borch family estate in the Dutch national col-
lections. A M K
fig. 2
170
47 The Music Lesson
c. 1668/1669, oil on canvas, 86.4 × 70.2 (34 × 27 £)

The Toledo Museum of Art, Purchased with funds from the Libbey
Endowment, Gift of Edward Drummond Libbey
An intimate duet provides an opportunity for a flirta- 1. Jacob Cats, “Quid non
sentit amor,” from
tious encounter between a man and a woman. Clothed
Sinne en Minnebeelden
in a long brown vest and breeches over a doublet with (The Hague, 1618)
ribbed gilt-embroidered sleeves, the man leans eagerly
toward the woman seated opposite. The bandolier slung
over his right shoulder supports a thin sword, the tip of
which is just visible by his left foot. His white stockings
are protected by gray canons, with striped tops bunched
about his knees. The young woman wears a fur-trimmed
jak over a loosened chemise and a satin skirt edged
with a broad band of gold embroidery. Her coiffure is
dressed with ribbons and pearls; a garnet earring dan-
gles from her ear. On the table are songbooks and a
metal platter with a roemer. Behind the table, a second
man leans over a chair back and gazes rather dolefully
at the lutenist.
Unlike most other musical subjects by Ter Borch,
in which one person plays an instrument and the other
sings, instructs, or listens appreciatively, here both the
woman and her male companion play instruments: the
man, a lute; the woman, a theorbo, a variant of the lute
with a second peg box set off from the neck of the
instrument to carry the bass strings (for the continuo).
The act of playing music together was an established
metaphor for harmony between a man and a woman in fig. 1
genre subjects and also in portraits of families and mar-

ried persons.1 A ubiquitous and versatile voice in solo two hearts perfectly attuned to each other. Similarly,
and small ensemble repertoire, the lute was particularly the popular songbook Cupidos lusthof (Cupid’s pleasure
rich in symbolic associations. While it could be an garden) (Amsterdam, 1613) illustrates a man playing a
erotic symbol, a metaphor for female genitals, or an violin and a woman playing a lute; the caption states
attribute of lust, the lute functioned most often as a that a harmonious duet was a sign of the couple’s
more or less neutral amorous symbol.2 An emblem mutual love.3
from Jacob Cats’ Sinne en Minnebeelden (The Hague, In narrative content and iconography, the Toledo
1618) (fig. 1), for example, shows a man tuning a lute, picture is closely linked to the Cincinnati Music Party
with a second lute on the table before him; the motto (cat. 48) and the Young Woman Playing a Theorbo to
explains that in tuning one lute, the strings of the other
begin to resonate to the same pitch, thus symbolizing
171
2. G
erard ter Borch, Two Young Men in the National Gallery, London (cat. 48,
The Duet, 1675, oil on
fig. 2); the three works were probably all painted within
canvas, Waddesdon,
The Rothschild a year or two of each other, but Ter Borch’s masterful
Collection, The manipulation of detail and psychological inflection
National Trust
refreshes even such close variations on a given theme.
In each scene, a musical interlude with amorous over-
tones is witnessed by a third figure, whose ambiguous
presence in the narrative injects a frisson of tension or
at least uncertainty into the proceedings. In the Toledo
Music Lesson, for example, the musical encounter is
skewed by the wary look and undefined role of the
rather gaunt man standing apart from the musical
couple. Is he an aggrieved music teacher, or a dejected
would-be suitor?4 The young boy standing by the table
in the Cincinnati Music Party (cat. 48), on the other
hand, seems utterly oblivious to the flirtation being
enacted before him. Finally, the Young Woman Playing
a Theorbo to Two Young Men seems less psychically
charged than either the Cincinnati or the Toledo paint-
ings. The mature solidity of the man singing and beat-
ing time and the impassive posture of the young lute-
nist bespeak a more sedate encounter. Yet an amorous
context is certainly intended here as well, for the play-
ing card — an ace of hearts — lies conspicuously in the
foreground of the picture. The role of the third figure in
this composition — again a man in a cloak and hat — is
subtly different, but no plainer.
In addition to the variations developed in the com- fig. 2
positions at London and Cincinnati, an autograph rep-
lica of the present picture, signed and dated 1675, is in
the collection at Waddesdon Manor (fig. 2). The Wad-
desdon painting was accepted by Gudlaugsson as the
original, and the Toledo painting as a replica by the art-
ist, but this view was reversed with the discovery in 1975
of the signature and date on the Toledo painting.5 The
correspondence between the two is extremely close;
some minor variation in the far contours of the lute-
nist’s face may be the result of overpainting. M E W
172
48 The Music Party
c. 1668/1670, oil on panel, 58.1 × 47.3 (22 ¢ × 18 £)

Cincinnati Art Museum, Bequest of Mary M. Emery
1. Gerard ter Borch, In the seventeenth century as now, music was an inte- ing cavalier (fig. 1); a diligent young lutenist and her
A Woman Playing the
gral part of Dutch culture at all levels of society. In music teacher; and a scene in which a man sings and
Theorbo for a Cavalier,
c. 1658, oil on panel, sophisticated circles, intimate musical gatherings were beats time as a woman stands with a lute and songbook
The Metropolitan not only a pleasurable means of escaping everyday cares, in her hands, poised inscrutably in the act of joining or
Museum of Art, New
York, Bequest of but a popular and accepted vehicle for facilitating social exiting the duet.4 In three other depictions of musical
Benjamin Altman, 1913 contacts, particularly with members of the opposite themes, Ter Borch purposefully complicated the
2. G
erard ter Borch, sex.1 Indeed, many seventeenth-century songbooks dynamics of the implied courtship ritual by introducing
Young Woman Playing published for domestic use were exclusively devoted to a third figure, a man, who observes or engages the musi-
a Theorbo to Two Young
Men, c. 1667 – 1668, amorous love songs.2 Music was a ubiquitous metaphor cal moment in subtly nuanced ways (compare fig. 2 and
oil on canvas, The for harmony amongst family members, friends, and cat. 47).
National Gallery,
London
lovers alike, and contemporary literary and emblematic In the present painting, a young woman seated in
references linking music and love are legion.3 profile to the left holds a theorbo-lute in her lap as she
As might be expected, Ter Borch’s interpretations turns the page of the songbook placed on the table
of the traditional “musical company” theme are deliber- before her. She wears a fur-trimmed jacket over a
ately and deliciously enigmatic — particularly in works gleaming white satin skirt and a carefully loosened
in which music supplies the fulcrum in encounters décolletage; curls, ribbons, and dangling garnet ear-
between the sexes. His paintings of amorous musical rings draw attention to the creamy skin of her throat.
duets include scenes of a woman serenading an admir- Lounging proprietarily across the table, a fashionable
fig. 1 fig. 2
174
gentleman with flowing blond hair holds an open song- ingly covert quality to the duet’s amorous subtext.
book, but seems more interested in attracting the Other compositions by Ter Borch that include a similar
young woman’s demurely lowered gaze through the figure of a cloaked observer (fig. 2 and cat. 47) are no
force of his own ardent stare. Standing behind the table less evasive in defining his purpose within the narrative.
is another young man, wrapped in a cloak and wearing The figure of the seated woman is repeated almost
a broad-brimmed hat; he glances down at the music, exactly, at full length, in Ter Borch’s Music Lesson in
possibly singing, but thoroughly oblivious to the inten- the Toledo Museum of Art (cat. 47).6 Differences are
sity of the exchange taking place before him. only minor: the angle and shape of the woman’s head,
The real subject of this picture is not the musical the direction of her gaze, her hairstyle, and the distance
performance per se, but the delicate balance of power of the figure to the table. The lower portion of the wom-
negotiated through the flirtatious exchanges of the an’s jak is more flared in the Cincinnati painting; penti-
courtship ritual. With painstakingly nuanced manipu- menti indicate the original contour was closer to that in
lations of pose and gesture, Ter Borch expressed all the the Toledo painting. Other pentimenti in the Cincin-
emotional uncertainties and quixotic reversals of love. nati painting reveal that the hem of the jak was origi-
Although the man’s languid pose is as informal as that nally more rounded at the side, its sleeves less full. Ter
of the young suitor in Woman Playing the Theorbo for Borch’s several adjustments to the composition suggest
a Cavalier (fig. 1), the woman’s attitude differs consider- that an intermediary drawing or tracing — which
ably, completely changing the tone of the picture. In the appears to have shifted slightly in the process — may
earlier painting, she is more openly flirtatious; here, she have been used to transpose the figure of the woman
is more modestly restrained, yet her downcast gaze is into the compositions.7 As the Toledo Music Lesson
countered by her inviting, forward leaning posture and bears a partly legible date of 166[?] (see cat. 47), the
ready participation in the musical duet.5 The role of the Music Party can presumably now also be dated to the
third figure in the composition is unclear (he seems too end of the 1660s. M E W
young to be a music teacher and too nonchalant to be a
spurned swain), but his very presence lends a titillat-
176
49 Gerbrand Pancras
1670, oil on canvas, 33.4 × 27.8 (13 ¡ × 10 •)

Manchester City Galleries
From the first part of the twentieth century until 1983, 1. Caspar Netscher,
Portrait of a Man, Pos-
this imperious portrait of an adolescent boy was identi-
sibly Coenraad Ruysch,
fied as Prince Hendrik Casimir II van Nassau-Dietz 1666, oil on canvas,
(1657 – 1696) who, in 1664 at the age of seven, had inher- present location
unknown
ited the stadholdership of the provinces of Friesland,
Groningen, and Drenthe.1 Although Gudlaugsson
retained the traditional identification, he acknowledged
that since the inscription on the painting clearly
described the boy as being twelve years of age, it would
have had to have been completed before the prince’s
thirteenth birthday on 18 January 1670.2 In 1983, Dudok
van Heel presented a convincing argument for identify-
ing the subject as Gerbrand Pancras (1658 – 1716), son of
the Amsterdam regent Nicolaes Pancras (1622 – 1678)
and his wife Petronella de Waert (1628 – 1709).3
After about fifteen years of activity centered almost
exclusively in and around Deventer, Ter Borch seems to
have been in Amsterdam on a regular basis from the
late 1660s. He also lived in exile in Amsterdam from
the spring of 1672, when the forces of the bishop of
Münster and the archbishop of Cologne occupied the
city of Deventer, until their withdrawal in the summer fig. 1
of 1674. Throughout the early 1670s Ter Borch secured
several prestigious portrait commissions from Amster- paintings are similarly inscribed with the subject’s age,
dam patrons. and signed and dated 1670.
He may have initially been drawn to the city by his As Kettering has noted, the formal conventions
half sister Jenneken’s marriage to Sijbrand Schellinger, of Ter Borch’s portraits of Amsterdam subjects differ
an Amsterdam merchant, in 1668.4 Schellinger was a considerably from his portraits of elite citizens of
distant relative of the Amsterdam regent François de Deventer (compare, for example, cats. 37, 38, 42, 43, 45).5
Vicq (1646 – 1709), and it was presumably through this Although considerable variety is found among the body
familial connection that Ter Borch was commissioned of portraits Ter Borch produced during the course of
to paint portraits of various members of the De Vicq his years in Deventer, a significant proportion of these
and Pancras families in 1670. In addition to the present small-scale works depict the figure at full length, stand-
painting, he furnished likenesses of Nicolaes Pancras ing or sitting erectly within a strikingly spare setting.
and Petronella de Waert, their daughter Aletta Pancras With a conspicuous emphasis on individual qualities of
(1649 – 1707), and her husband François de Vicq. All five moderation and decorum, the portraits convey a uni-
formly confident, prosperous yet inherently sober
image of Deventer’s ruling elite. In contrast, Ter Borch’s
177
Amsterdam portraits are much showier affairs. They rose-pink ribbons adorns the elbow-length sleeves. On
depict the figure at three-quarter length, a format that the table at right is a broad-brimmed hat trimmed with
inevitably brings the subject closer to the picture plane an extravagant white feather. Pancras’ right hand rests
and forces a greater intimacy between subject and on a walking stick with an ivory knob; an ornamental
viewer; and these works focus greater attention on the sword is suspended from a belt at his left hip. Ter
subject’s physiognomy and elaborate costume details. Borch’s attentiveness to the minutiae of sartorial display
In these paintings Ter Borch was undoubtedly respond- does not overwhelm his insightful rendering of the
ing to the more decorative and lushly appointed small- boy’s physiognomy, however. With a thin-lipped mouth
scale portraits being produced in the urban centers of and a wary, somewhat dismissive stare emanating from
Holland by younger colleagues, such as his former pupil beneath heavy eyelids, Gerbrand Pancras’ painted por-
Caspar Netscher (fig. 1). trait intimates the hauteur of and privilege claimed by
Although Ter Borch retained his customarily this heir to one of Amsterdam’s most powerful regent
sparse and understated setting in the present picture, families.
the garments worn by Gerbrand Pancras are among the A Portrait of a Young Nobleman, formerly in the
most colorful and elaborate the artist ever painted in a collection of A. J. de Jong, Schouwenburg, is based upon
portrait. Pancras sports the newly fashionable English- Ter Borch’s Gerbrand Pancras and appears to be a stu-
style suit, with a long close-fitting coat and hip-length dio work. M E W
vest over relatively narrow breeches.6 Worn over a silver
brocade waistcoat, the light gray coat and breeches are
trimmed with black lace and silver braid; a profusion of
179
50 Young Man Reading
c. 1680, oil on panel, 40.3 × 34.4 (15 ¢ × 13 ∞)

The Detroit Institute of Arts, City of Detroit Purchase
Ter Borch had a remarkable ability to create a narrative attractive and elegant appearance, the young man is
scenario for his genre scenes that never appears artifi- shown focusing not on matters of the heart but on mat-
cially staged. Figures exist comfortably in their spaces, ters of the mind. While at ease in his own home, he,
at ease with their environment if not always with their unlike the young women in Ter Borch’s paintings, is
psychological state of being. This young man seems concerned with issues that lie beyond the domestic
particularly at home, even though, to judge from the sphere.
ivory-tipped walking stick and yellow black-fringed As Gudlaugsson has noted, the young man’s cos-
pouch lying on the table, he has just returned from out- tume, with its carefully folded linen jabot, was influ-
of-doors. Still wearing his fur-lined cap, he has settled enced by French fashions that came into mode about
down to read the latest news from the sheet of paper he 1680.3 Characteristic of the artist’s palette from this late
holds in his two hands. With lowered eyes and partially period of his career are the carefully nuanced brown
opened mouth, he carefully peruses the text before him, tonalities in the figure’s costume; Ter Borch used them
quietly turning back the paper to allow light to fall on to create a foil for the young man’s concentrated expres-
its raised surface. sion. He further enlivened the image with the white
The young man in this charming image suffers accents of the jabot, cuffs, ivory-tipped walking stick,
from none of the painful uncertainties afflicting young and most important, the letter itself. Finally, this paint-
women who are seen reading letters in Ter Borch’s ing, which may have been Ter Borch’s last genre scene,
paintings (see cat. 41). But, then again, he is reading not convincingly demonstrates that the artist never lost his
from a letter but from a printed page, probably a broad- ability to portray the faces of younger generations with
sheet, which had once been folded down the middle.1 sympathy and understanding.4 The identity of the model
The imprint of the printed text on the recto can be is not known, but he might possibly have been a friend
detected from the regular borders along the margins of or acquaintance of the artist, whose portrait he painted
the sheet, which Ter Borch marked through subtle vari- in the guise of a genre scene. A K W
ations in color. Broadsheets were particularly impor-
tant for spreading news about contemporary political
and social issues in provincial towns such as Deventer,
in part because the publishing industry was primarily
situated in Amsterdam and Leiden.2 Thus, despite his
180
51 Lucretia Rouse, Wife of the Preacher Jan van Duren
1680, oil on canvas, 78.5 × 64 (30 ¢ × 25 ^)

Collection Rijksmuseum Twenthe, Enschede
52 The Preacher Jan van Duren
1681, oil on canvas, 78.1 × 63.8 (30 # × 25 ¡)

Collection Richard and Marcia Ehrlich, Beverly Hills
1. Abraham Bloteling These pendant portraits are reunited here for the first
after Michiel van
time since 1929, when they were exhibited together in
Musscher, Tobias
Govertsz van den Berlin.1 The identity of the sitters, the preacher Jan van
Wyngaert, 1667, Duren (1642 – 1709) and his wife Lucretia Rouse, is
engraving, Rijks
prentenkabinet, known because of the coat of arms hanging on the back
Amsterdam wall of each painting.2 The dates of execution, 1680 for
Lucretia and 1681 for Jan, are also known because the
poet Arnoldus Moonen mentioned them when he
wrote celebratory verses about the paintings in his
poetry book Poëzy, which he published in 1700.3 Thus,
they are among the very last paintings executed by Ter
Borch, who died in Deventer on 8 December 1681.
Lucretia, a native of Haarlem, was the daughter of
the cavalry captain Joan Rouse (died 18 January 1667)
and Maria Olijcan. Her betrothal to Jan van Duren,
son of Gerryt van Duren and Mecheltien Roeks, and
“dienaer des Godtlicken Woords” (minister of God’s
words), was recorded in Zwolle on 12 October 1667.4
They apparently lived in Zwolle until 1673 when Jan was
called to preach in Deventer, where the couple probably
came to know Ter Borch.
Documents indicate that Ter Borch was in Haar-
fig. 1
lem in September of 1680, negotiating a contract for
a portrait with the merchant Elias Trip.5 Therefore,
Ter Borch must have painted these portraits after he green curtain protecting the leather-bound volumes
returned to Deventer, depicting Lucretia in the late also serves as a backdrop for the sitter. It has been
fall of 1680 and Jan in the beginning of 1681. Although pulled aside to allow the sitter access to the books.
Ter Borch appears to have executed these portraits at Indeed, occasional gaps on the shelves indicate that he
slightly different times, he certainly conceived them as actively uses the books for research and for developing
a pair from the very beginning. ideas for his own writings. The paper for his text lies on
Ter Borch presented Jan van Duren as a scholar the table beneath the silver writing set. For a preacher
who is fingering the pages of a large tome resting on a
writing table located before a large bookcase. The dark
182
of God’s word, a thorough understanding of biblical bearing and demeanor would seem to support this
texts was extremely important. hypothesis.10 Arnoldus Moonen’s poem about this por-
Ter Borch’s painting belongs to a well-established trait celebrates Ter Borch’s ability to capture not only
tradition in Dutch art of depicting preachers seated her physical appearance but also the essence of her soul,
before a bookcase reading texts in their study (fig. 1).6 which had so attracted her husband from early in his
Seventeenth-century inventories indicate that such youth.11
studies were sparsely furnished, with little more than a The format that Ter Borch chose for these full-
desk and a chair, and that bookcases were frequently length, seated pendant portraits was one that he had
protected from dust and bugs by curtains, which were devised in the late 1660s and early 1670s. A comparable
generally blue or green.7 Jan van Duren wears a brown pair portrays the Deventer burgomaster Hendrik Nilant
robe that was a type of tabbaard, a garment (generally and his wife Anna Wentholt, which Ter Borch painted
associated with scholars) that conveyed an aura of about 1670.12 The closest equivalent for the portrait of
respectability and stateliness.8 By the 1660s Japanese Jan van Duren, however, is a portrait Ter Borch made of
robes had influenced the style of the tabbaard, which Hermannus Quadacker, the son of a Deventer burgo-
had been traditionally trimmed in fur, and Jan’s loosely master.13 Quadacker, who studied law at Leiden, also
draped garment reflects this new fashion.9 wears a tabbaard as he sits at his desk in his study
Lucretia wears a black dress and sits quietly near a before a large bookcase. As in the portrait of Jan van
table without a book in sight. Her gentle face, animated Duren, on his desk are an ink set and quill pen indicat-
by a slight smile, peers out from under a distinctive and ing his active, scholarly interests. A K W
unusual white lace cap covered by a black cloth. It has
been suggested that this unusual headdress, in combi-
nation with the black outer garment lying on the table,
is indicative of mourning, although nothing in her
183
Letter, 3 July 1635
from Gerard ter Borch the Elder
to his son in London
188
Lieve kint ick seijnde u den leeman, doch sonder Dear child, I am sending you the manikin, but opposite
Letter, 1635, Collec
block: omdat hij te groot en te swaer is int coffer te without a stand because it is too large and too heavy to tion Frits Lugt, Institut
leggen: en om een kleijn gellt koent ghij daer een block put in the trunk. For a small amount of money you can Néerlandais, Paris
doen maeken, gebruickt den leeman en laet hem niet have a stand made there. Use the manikin and do not
stille staen als hij hijr gedaen heeft, doch teijckent let it stand idle, as it has done here, but draw a lot: large,
veel: groote en woelende ordonantien, gelick de ghij dynamic compositions [ordonantien], like those you
met genoomen hebbet, daer P.Molijn u plegt om te have taken with you, which P. Molyn pledged you to
beminnen, en als ghij schilderen wilt: dan schildert cherish. And when you wish to paint, work up [schildert
ock wat ordonantsij van modarn bij u rommelerij ten ...op] some modern compositions [ordonantsij van
eersten op gelick ghij well koent: want dat spoet besst: modarn], as you surely can, putting in your stuff [bij u
en blijft ock schoonst en vloeijent int besterven also rommelerij]1 right from the start, because that goes Notes
1. According to the Woor-
doende sult ghij well bemint warden met Godt: gelijck most quickly and stays most beautiful and flowing denboek der Nederlandsche
ghij ock tot Haerlem en tot Amsterdam waert, wat ghij while drying.2 If you do that you will be loved by God, Taal (WNT), rommelerij
is equivalent to old
begint inde naem des Heeren: dat sal u well gelucken: as you were in Haarlem and Amsterdam. What you household objects (oud
gelick het u voor desen altijt ock well geluckt heeft: begin in the name of the Lord will turn out well, just as huisraad). In this case,
household stuff could
daer omme voor alle dingen dieent Godt, en weest it has always turned out well for you before this. There- mean props. However,
beleeft, nederich en gedieenstwillich tegen alle mensen fore serve God above all and be courteous, humble and Hexham’s seventeenth-
century Dutch-English
so sal het u well gaen. Ick seijnde u ock u kleet: kause- obliging toward all people and it will go well for you.
dictionary (1671) sug
banden, schoe en schoelinten, hoedebantken, 6 beffen, I am also sending you some clothing: garters, shoes, gests that the word could
6 noesdoecken, 2 mutsen: Schrijft al u linnen fraeij op shoelaces, hatbands, 6 shirtbands, 6 handkerchiefs, have had an alternative
meaning for Ter Borch.
so koent ghij altijt u goet nae sieen dat ghij niet verlieest, 2 caps. Take note of your linen, look after it well, so that Its definition for romme
ick seijnde u meer als een elle laeken van u besste kleet: you’ll be missing nothing. I am sending you more than laer is one who pushes to
and fro — which is very
om als den broeck kael is, dan koent ghij hem om doen one ell of cloth from your best suit. If your trousers are close to “rummaging
keeren: en van dit laeken well 2 nije voorstucken krijgen threadbare, you can turn them. From this piece of cloth about,” the interpreta
tion used by Arie Wallert
of een paer nije mouwen: wat ghij dan besst van doen you can have 2 new frontpieces made or a pair of new in his essay.
hebbet, ock zijn hijr bij lappen laeken tot u daegelix sleeves, whichever you need most. Here too are pieces
2. This translation
kleet: alst begint te breecken om daer met te hellpen, of cloth for your daily clothing, in order to help you is based on the one
ick seijnde u teijckenkoockerken vol van u nije lange when it begins to tear. I am sending you a brush holder, appearing in Kettering
1988, 2:864 – 865, but
penseelen, 2 boeck pampijr, swartkijt en alle schoone complete with new long brushes, 2 books of paper, with important revi
varuwen, en 6 van Matthams pennen int pitsieer, so black chalk, an assortment of beautiful colors and 6 of sions in the opening
sentences.
ghij wat anders van doen hebbet dat schrijft mij ick salt Matham’s pens in seals [?]. If you need something else,
u seijnden. Hijr mede doe ick, en moeder en kinder, neef then write me, I will send it to you. Herewith I pass on
Berent en Jan ter Borch, Engbert en alle goede vrieen: greetings from mother and children, cousin Berent and
den u neffens Roebert oom seer groeten in Zwoll den Jan ter Borch, Engbert and all good friends and relatives
3 Julij Nije stij 1635, u.g.w.vaeder Gerhard ter Borch. to Uncle Robert, [signed] in Zwolle the 3rd of July new
Het koffer hebbe ick met beddebuijr en tou doen om style 1635, with all good will, your father Gerhard ter
packen en met lack verseegelt o dat het niet kan Borch. The trunk I have wrapped in a bed cover and
opgesteecken worden tied with rope and sealed with wax so that it cannot
be opened.
189 l e t t e r f r o m g e r a r d t e r b o r c h t h e e l d e r t o h i s s o n
190
Notes to the Essays  Bibliography
Notes to the Catalogue Exhibitions
Index
191 n o t e s
The Artistic Development of
Gerard ter Borch
Notes to the Essays 1. I would like to thank Elizabeth Nogrady, 1988, 2:633 and 702, folio 45, recto, and folio 46, 24. Houbraken 1753, 3:34; G 1959 – 1960, 2:10.
Anna Tummers, and Alison Kettering for their recto), Harmen (Kettering 1988, 1:278, no. H20,
25. G 1959 – 1960, 2:23. “Tot Madrid in ’t Paleys
observations and assistance in preparing this and Kettering 1988, 2:834 – 835, no. 39), Gesina
des Konincks groot en schoone,/Quam oock
essay. (Kettering 1988, 2:403, folio 9, recto, 404, folio
zyn Naem en Roem, jae selven syn Persoone,/
10, verso, 489, folio 8, recto, and 425 – 426,
2. For Steen’s reputation, see Chapman “Jan Daer hy de Koninck heeft seer konstigh af-
folio 8, recto), and Moses (Kettering 1988,
Steen, Player in His Own Paintings,” in Wash- gebeelt,/ Soo dat dar aen gantsch niet, dan
2:844 – 845, nos. 59 and 60, among others).
ington and Amsterdam 1996, 11 – 24. slechts het leven scheelt.”
13. G 1959 – 1960, 1:21 – 22.
3. The basis for our current understanding of 26. G 1959 – 1960, 1:184, repro., 2:58 – 59, no. 9.
Ter Borch’s life is Sturla Gudlaugsson’s exem- 14. For an excellent discussion of this sketch-
27. For these works, see G 1959 – 1960, 1:194 –
plary monograph on the artist (G 1959 – 1960). book, see Kettering 1988, 1:152 – 191.
200, 212, repro., 2:63 – 67, 72, nos. 20 – 26, 39.
The documentary evidence he unearthed and
15. Documents indicate that Ter Borch became
his sensitive interpretation of the artist’s work 28. G 1959 – 1960, 2:9 – 10, 20. Both Gesina and
a master in the Saint Luke’s Guild in Haarlem
are cited throughout this catalogue. None of the schoolmaster J.H. Roldanus mention that
in 1635. Only after he had become a master
the recent documentary discoveries (see note her half brother had been knighted in the
would he have been permitted to sign and date
44) or reassessments of Ter Borch’s paintings Spanish court. Arnoldus Moonen refers to
one of his paintings. See G 1959 – 1960, 2:15.
has seriously compromised the conclusions Ter Borch as “Ridder Ter Borgh” (knight) (see
Gudlaugsson reached in his work. 16. For this document, see Antony Griffiths, cat. 52, notes 3 and 11).
“ ‘The Print in Stuart Britain’ Revisited,” Print
4. Houbraken 1753, 3:32, 34 – 40. 29. For a discussion of the concept of doorsien,
Quarterly 17 (2000), 117.
a term first mentioned in Van Mander 1604,
5. For an outstanding assessment of this mate-
17. The letter is reproduced and translated book 5, 4, see Hollander 2002.
rial, see Kettering 1988.
on pages 188 – 189. See also Kettering 1988,
30. See An Old Woman Spinning, c. 1646 – 1648,
6. Kettering 1988, 1:4, notes that Gerard the 2:864 – 865.
The Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, in
Elder owned drawings by, among others,
18. For further discussions of this letter, see Amsterdam, Hartford, and San Francisco 2002,
Abraham Bloemaert of Utrecht, Hans Bol of
the essays by Kettering and Wallert in this 71 – 73, no. 2, repro.
Amsterdam, and Hendrik Goltzius of Haarlem.
catalogue.
Early in his career Gerard the Younger copied a 31. See Jonathan Bikker, “Sweerts’s Life and
print based on a Goltzius design (see Kettering 19. G 1959 – 1960, 2:16. Career — A Documentary View,” in Amster-
1988, 1:92 – 93, repro.), which must have come dam, Hartford, and San Francisco 2002, 25 – 36,
20. See Kettering 1988, 1:128, no. GJr 60. Ter
from his father’s collection. for a discussion of Sweerts’ relationship with
Borch seems to have returned to Zwolle with
the Deutz brothers and Anthonij de Bordes, all
7. See Kettering 1988, 1:4, and Kettering 1988, an impression of Van Voerst’s engraving of
of whom were traveling in Italy in the late
2:88, item A 10. Kenelm Digby, another image belonging to
1640s. For an image of one of Sweerts’ paint-
The Iconography, which his half brother Moses
8. See for example, Kettering 1988, 1:22, no. ings of a woman spinning yarn from the 1640s,
eventually copied. See Kettering 1988, 1:298 –
GSr16, for a discussion of a drawing by a differ- see Kultzen 1996, no. 11.
299, no. M 21.
ent artist depicting the same view as Gerard
32. Kettering 1988, 2:435 – 436, 510. On this folio
the Elder’s depiction of the Ponte Rotto. 21. See, for example, Hendrik Pot’s Portrait of
from Gesina’s poetry album, the shepherd
Charles I, 1632, Musée de Louvre, Paris, inv. no.
9. Kettering 1988, 1:92 – 95, nos. GJr 2, GJr 3, and Phijllis kneels before the shepherdess Amaril
1730.
GJr 5. to declare his unflagging devotion even though
22. Another of Ter Borch’s mother’s brothers, she has scorned him. As Kettering notes, the
10. Kettering 1988, 1:100 – 101, nos. GJr 16 and
Thomas de Bonte, was the artist’s guardian. It sentiments of this poem are similar to those
GJr 17.
seems, however, that by 1635 he was living in found in the writings of Jan Hermansz Krul,
11. Kettering 1988, 1:104 – 106, nos. GJr 21 – GJr Kampen. See Houck 1899, 98, and G 1959 – 1960, one of the authors whose love laments Gesina
25. 2:47. frequently transcribed in her album.
12. Copies and counterproofs are frequently 23. G 1959 – 1960, 1:30. See also Wieseman 2002, 33. For an excellent discussion of the character
found amongst the drawings preserved from 314, no. B1. It is possible that the painting was of seventeenth-century songbooks, see Nevitt
the Ter Borch family. See, for example, draw- in the possession of one of Ter Borch’s patrons 2003, 50 – 98. For Gesina’s poetry album, see
ings attributed to Gerard the Younger (Ketter- in Zwolle or Deventer, where his pupil Caspar Kettering 1988, 2:420 – 614.
ing 1988, 1:96 – 98, nos. GJr 8 – GJr 10; Kettering Netscher could have seen and freely adapted it
in a copy he made in 1659.
192 n o t e s t o p a g e s 2 – 1 2
Gerard ter Borch and the
Modern Manner
34. Kettering 1988, 2:440, folio 39, verso, of 43. Van de Wetering 1993, 29 – 33, notes that a paint a portrait in the “manner” of his portrait 1. The sentence is as hard to interpret in mod-
Gesina’s poetry album. This list and one number of seventeenth-century art theorists, of the prince of Orange. See G 1959 – 1960, 2:30. ern Dutch as it is to translate into English. But
appearing on folio iii, recto, were written by among them Karel van Mander, Theodore de The document is dated 5 September 1680. it seems to contain two main ideas: that
her brother Harmen. Mayerne, and Cornelis Pietersz Biens, recom- Gerard the Younger should continue to paint
52. G 1959 – 1960, 2:29 – 30.
mended painting different types of cloth from “modern compositions” (ordonantsij van
35. See note 25.
life. Careful observation of satin was particu- 53. G 1959 – 1960, 2:30. The document for this modarn) and that he should paint in a quick
36. For Netscher, see Wieseman 2002. Netscher larly important because of the various reflec- commission is dated 26 October 1678. and flowing manner, without the usual stages
was a talented artist who learned many of his tive sheens the fabric created in different light. of underdrawing and dead coloring. The letter
54. G 1959 – 1960, 2:9, document 2. “Hier onder
master’s techniques for rendering luxurious is reproduced and translated on pages 188 – 189.
44. Montias 1989, 102 – 104, 308, doc. 251. leijdt een werelts wonder,/Heel vermaert in alle
textures during his apprenticeship with Ter Please note that the translation differs slightly
lant,/Daer sijn kunst reght was bekant.”
Borch from c. 1654 to c. 1658/1659. He painted, 45. One wonders, for example, whether Ter from that in Kettering 1988, 2:864 – 865. For
in addition to his own original compositions, a Borch may have met the captain, Johan van den 55. Houbraken 1753, 3:35. an interpretation that emphasizes the second,
number of signed copies of Ter Borch’s works. Bosch, or the widow’s husband, Dido van Tres- technical aspect of Gerard the Elder’s advice,
56. Smith 1829 – 1842, 4:114.
long, in Münster. For Johannes Renialme, see see Arie Wallert’s essay and note 1 of the letter.
37. For a discussion of Ter Borch’s reputed
G 1959 – 1960, 2:25, and Montias 1989, 139 – 141, My thanks go to Hans Luijten for his impor-
students and followers, see G 1959 – 1960, 2:
312, doc. 269. tant help in translating and understanding this
285 – 294.
sentence, as well as to Melanie Gifford, Arie
46. For a particularly close derivation of a
38. The high quality of many of the copies has Wallert, and Frederick Kettering for discus-
Ter Borch composition by Gabriel Metsu,
often confounded connoisseurs who sought to sions of the passage. I would also like to thank
see Korthals Altes 2000 – 2001, 266, fig. 16
determine whether or not a specific work was Lisa Vergara for help with the entire essay.
(HdG 189).Ter Borch’s paintings were also
executed by the master. The confusion already
admired in The Hague, perhaps in part because 2. See P. Biesboer, “Judith Leyster: Painter of
existed at the beginning of the eighteenth
of Caspar Netscher, who moved there in 1662 ‘Modern Figures,’” in Judith Leyster, A Dutch
century, as is evident in a dispute about the
after a trip to France. Master and Her World (exh. cat., Worcester
attribution of two Ter Borch paintings from
Art Museum) [Worcester, 1993], 75; Nevitt
the Antwerp collector Constantinus Francken 47. The role of the art dealer in commissioning
2003, 29 – 35; and Kolfin 2002, 96. J. Michael
that were auctioned in Amsterdam on 12 April such copies in the Dutch art market is not well
Montias, who is writing an article “On the
1701. Their qualities were assessed by the col- understood. According to Hans van Miegroet
Description of Works of Art in Seventeenth-
lector and art dealer Jan Pietersz Zomer and (personal communication), this practice was
Century Dutch Inventories and Auction Sales,”
the artist Jan van Hughtenburch, but in the well established in the Flemish market. For a
has provided me with more instances of the
end they could not decide whether the paint- list of the copies made by Van der Neer and
use of “modern” to designate genre paintings.
ings were copies or originals. See A.C. Steenis- Musscher, see G 1959 – 1960, 2:289 – 290.
By the 1630s, the use of “modern” in this regard
Muntjewerf, “Een Weddenschap over een
48. In 1668 his half sister Jenneken (1640 – 1675) was fairly common currency. The term was
Terburch,” Oud-Holland 69 (1954), 123 – 124.
married an Amsterdam merchant, Sijbrand used earlier by Karel van Mander to refer to
39. For an excellent discussion of this period of Schellinger, who was related to the Pancras figures in contemporary dress. My thanks go to
Ter Borch’s career, see Kettering 1999a. family. See the discussion under cat. 49. Wayne Franits and Michael Montias for their
help with uses of the term and to Perry Chap-
40. See Kettering 1999a, 56 – 57. 49. See G 1959 – 1960, 1:156 – 158, 2:226 – 228, nos.
man for its possible political implications. See
262 – 265; Kettering 1999a, 67 – 69. Dudok van
41. For example, Gaehtgens 1987, 433, publishes Chapman 2000, 55 – 58.
Heel 1983, 68, also notes that in 1674 Ter Borch
an account by the son-in-law of Adriaen van
made a copy of a portrait of a Johan de Witt by 3. F. Frascina et al., Modernity and Modernism,
der Werff noting that Van der Werff studied
Caspar Netscher. French Painting in the Nineteenth Century
with Eglon van der Neer, “a very skilled master
(New Haven and London, 1993), 3 – 10; Baude-
in the handling of the brush and the thor- 50. Houbraken 1753, 3:37 – 39. The first portrait
laire 1964, 13 (the original article appeared in
oughly mixing of paints. However, he [Van der was destroyed by the invading forces from
Figaro, 1863).
Neer] chose the modern manner (as that of Münster and Cologne; Ter Borch completed
Terburgh) to paint satin skirts and other the second portrait some years later in The 4. Hecht 1998:169; Jowell 1974:114 – 116; Rosen
dresses.” Hague. This portrait is also lost. See Kettering and Zerner 1984:193 – 200.
1999a, 69, note 90.
42. For this subject, see the essay in the cata- 5. Sluijter 2000. For a translation, see Angel
logue by Arie Wallert. For a differing interpre- 51. G 1959 – 1960, 1:165. Unfortunately these 1996.
tation of Ter Borch’s method of painting satins, portraits are lost. On his return to Deventer in
6. Van Mander 1994.
see Van de Wetering 1993. September 1680 Ter Borch stopped in Haarlem,
where the merchant Elias Trip asked him to
193 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 2 – 1 7 , 2 0 – 2 1
The Miracle of
Gerard ter Borch’s Satin
7. Vergara 1998, 246. 1. Houbraken 1753, 3:39, “Hy wist door zyn Konst 7. Hoogstraten 1678, 262: “Weerglans is wel the dress of the standing lady in the Berlin
penceel niet alleen de vaste wezenstrekken, en eygentlijk een wederomkaetsing van het licht Paternal Admonition. Similarly, a tracing from
8. Kemmer 1998, 91 – 96.
den ganschen zwier levendig na te bootzen, van alle verlichte dingen, maar in de konst the Glass of Lemonade in a private collection
9. Vergara 1998, 246 – 247; Brown 1984, 62. maar ook de bekleedingen, en byzondere stof- noemen wy maer alleen reflexie of weerglans, (cat. 40) matched exactly the figural composi-
fen naar hun aard, doch boven al het wit Satyn de tweede verlichting, die in de schaduwe valt.” tion in the Hermitage version (cat. 39), (per-
10. Kettering 1988, 1: GJr 5, 20; 2:748.
zoo natuurlyk, dun en konstig te schilderen, sonal communication, W. Khoudiakov). A
8. “En als ’er veele dingen bij een liggen B.E.
11. Franits 2004. dat het waarlyk Satyn scheen te wezen, waar tracing of the figure in the Music Lesson in
vrugten., dan moeten de schadijen der
om hy het zelve ook menigwerf in zyne Konst- Toledo (cat. 47), made by Larry Nichols, was
12. For a fuller discussion of Ter Borch’s mili- vruchten die naest den dagh liggen soo flauwe
stukken te pas bracht.” laid over the Cincinnati version (cat. 48). The
tary paintings, see Kettering 2000, 100 – 122 sijn dat sij bijne geen schadije en sijn en de
comparison did show some minor changes, but
(please note the errata in the first two illustra- 2. The influence, especially for their composi- lichten van de vruchten die in de schadije
again it appears that the two women were
tions: fig. 1 should show the illustration in fig. 2 tional schemes, of Codde and Duyster in the liggen moeten soo weijnig sijn dat sij de
taken from the same preliminary drawing,
and vice versa); and Kettering 1999b, 513 – 540. early 1630s on the formation of the young schaduwe van den geheelen hoop niet en
which must have shifted a bit in the transfer
Ter Borch has already been noted. See quellen, maer den geheelen hoop moet gecon-
13. Angel 1996, 244. process (personal communication, M. Wiese-
G 1959 – 1960, 2:54, 56 – 57, 70, 80, 100. sidereert worden al oft maar een vrught en
man).
14. For example, Houbraken 1753, 3:39. waer, ende dit heeft plaets in figuren, boomen,
3. Angel 1966, 248, translation of Angel
blommen en in alle andere dingen die groepen 14. M. Merrifield, Original Treatises on the Arts
15. Houbraken 1753, 3:174, observes that Eglon 1642, 55.
oft hoopen konnen maeken” in K. Dankers of Painting (London, 1849), 2:736.
van der Neer (see chapter 17) painted merry
4. Letter from Gerard ter Borch the Elder to his (illustrated by Adrianus Wiltschut), “Teycken-
companies dressed in the modern fashion in 15. Van Mander 1604, folios 47, verso, 190, verso,
son in London, 3 July 1635 (Paris, Fondation bovk, voor de Jonge Jeught” (Brussels?, 1701),
the manner of Ter Borch. Likewise, in Adriaen 252, verso, 263, verso.
Custodia, Institut Néerlandais, inv. no. 490). 12, manuscript in the Collection Frits Lugt,
van der Werff’s autobiography (see chapter 17)
The letter is reproduced and translated on Institut Néerlandais, Paris, Ms 1997 – A.1186. 16. A. Wallert and M. Bijl, “Two of Many:
written down by his son-in-law, he says that
pages 188 – 189. My thanks go to Alison Ketter- On the Wiltschut treatise, see Van Eikema A Pair of Diptych Panels in the Amsterdam
Van der Neer painted satin dresses and other
ing for discussing this difficult and very impor- Hommes 1999, 25 – 38, especially 36 – 37. Also Rijksmuseum,” in La Peinture et le Laboratoire;
garments in the “modern manner” of Ter
tant passage with me. see Bolten 1985, 142 – 147. Procédés, Méthodologie, Applications, Col
Borch. For this passage, see Gaehtgens 1987,
loque XIII, Le dessin sous-jacent et la technolo
433. For an earlier reference to modernity, see 5. There is little information about the use of 9. Van de Wetering 1993, 28 – 37.
gie dans la peinture, eds. R. Van Schoute and
Van Mander 1994, 1:457. Van Mander also uses lay figures in seventeenth-century painting.
10. G 1959 – 1960, 1:378, repro.; 2:221 – 222, H. Veroughstraete (Leuven, 2001): 35 – 44. As
the term to describe a work by Goltzius (1:394). A good impression of the construction and
no. 252 (R. Lebel, Paris 1963). these mechanically transferred underdrawings
See also the examples quoted by Pauw-De Veen appearance of such figures can be gained from
would normally appear as white lines on the
1969, 171, 173, 174, 179. Adriaen van Ostade’s panel painting The Land 11. Kolfin 2002.
gray ground of the canvas, it is impossible to
scape Painter in His Studio, from about 1663
16. Kettering 1993/1997, 98 – 101. 12. See G 1959 – 1960, 2:16, for the entry on detect them with infrared reflectography.
(Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden, inv.
Gerard ter Borch’s purchase of painters’ equip-
17. Kettering 1993/1997, 101 – 102. For contempo- no. 7397). About the making of seventeenth- 17. “Beau labeur en bleu. Faittes avec esmail &
ment (Deventer Municipal Archive, inventory
rary writings on masculinity and effeminacy, century laymen see the 1636 treatise De blanc de plomb (duquel tant plus y a, tant plus
Assenstraat 1638 – 1669 no. 145). In the entry
see Kettering 1997. teecken-const by Biens: E. A. de Klerk, “ ‘De la couleur s’estend facilement) couchés le tout
the art books (probably sketchbooks) and
Teecken-Const,’ een 17de eeuws Nederlands avec ces couleurs. Enfoncés avec Laque. Glacés
18. See Sutton 1997. prints figure quite prominently: “Meyster
traktaatje,” Oud Holland 96 (1982): 16 – 60. par dessus avec Ultramarin” (De Graaf 1958,
Gerardt de Schilder heeft van my gekoft in den
19. Honig 1997, 195. 149). On dead coloring, also see A. Wallert,
6. Roger de Piles, Verhandeling over de Schil Jare 1636 den 10 Juny de Kunstboecken ende
“Methods and Materials of Still-Life Painting in
20. Honig 2001, 294. derkunde door den heer de Piles, benevens eene figuren prenten ende allerhande gereetschap-
the Seventeenth Century,” in Amsterdam 1999,
samenspraak over hetzelfde onderwerp door pen van pletten penselen, Esels oock alder-
7 – 24, especially 21 – 24.
Ludovico Dolce waarin over de voortreffe hande verwen ende geverwde linde doecken in
lykheden dier konst en de nodige vereischtens lesten geraemt te samen bedongen voor 18. Amsterdam 1999; see also De Graaf 1958,
van een schilder breedvoerig gehandelt wordt, d’somma van vyftee guld. Hier f. 15 – 0-0 by my, 151: “Il fault premierement peindre les couleurs
trans. P. den Hengst and A. Mens Jansz. Heyltgen Stoltenberg als doen weduwe van mortes, cest a dire mettre la premiere couche
(Amsterdam, 1756), 233. The same picture is Renes.” On Dutch drawing books, see Bolten avec Cynabre & Lacque, apres laisser seicher,
also reproduced in the original edition: Cours 1985. puis fault glacer de belle lacque, & la dessus
de Peinture par Principe, composé par Mr. De enforcer de lacque, & au plus fort de noir
13. A tracing on a transparent Mylar sheet of
Piles (Paris, 1708), 382. d’yvoire prépareés avec verdegris & couperose
the dress of the standing lady in the Amster-
comme dessus, & rehausser de Cynabre, & dún
dam Paternal Admonition (cat. 27), matched,
peu de tresbelle mine ou de Cynabre avec tant
in general position as well as in drapery details,
soit peu de blanc de plomb.”
194 n o t e s t o p a g e s 2 2 – 2 9 , 3 2 – 3 6
19. Beurs 1692, 30: “(Sneeuw) Om die in zijn quartz (SiO2). The finding of such an uncon- 13 May 2003). No relationship with exclusive
eigen dag te schilderen mengeltmen wit en ventional single quartz ground is highly excep- Zwolle or Deventer units of measurement
koolswart na behooren: zoo ’t wat te blaauw tional. See K. Groen, “Seventeenth Century could be established. A relation, however, with
viel, doet er wat lak onder. De schaduwe wil Grounds in Rembrandt’s Studio and in Paint- the inch according to the so-called “roedental”
koolswart en een weynig wit en ligter oker ings by His Contemporaries,” in A Corpus of of Mastenbroek seems probable. This is a unit,
hebben tot zoo een trap van yeder, als ’t leven Rembrandt Paintings, 4 (Dordrecht and Lon- dating from 1533, and current only in the prov-
gebieden zal. ’t Zelve is voor de weersteutinge don, forthcoming). ince of Overijssel, that was used in both Zwolle
goed, als er wat meer wit en ligten oker by is.” and Deventer. See R. Rentenaar, Van Swindens
24. My translation of this enigmatic sentence
On the Beurs treatise, see Van Eikema Vergelijkingstafels van Lengtematen en Land
differs from Alison Kettering’s. Our interpreta-
Hommes 1999, 32 – 36. maten, vol. 1 (Wageningen, 1971), 80.
tions are discussed in note 1, page 189.
20. Beurs 1692, 31: “’t zelve mengsel met de 28. The plaits that make up the skirt are indi-
25. This approach can be traced back to the
satynen vereischende: zy heeft met de sneeuw cated by a dark brown, almost black linear
methods practiced for the production of merry
groote gemeenschap, dogz’ heeft wat meer drawing. Also on her left sleeve such lines
company scenes in Haarlem and Amsterdam.
glans, zoo dat haar wit, door schilpwit moet show through. The pattern of oval shapes in
See Kolfin 2002, 119 – 131, 137.
gevonden worden, en ze zuiver moet geschil- the underdrawing of her left sleeve is in agree-
dert zijn, en gans warm in’t sonneligt, daar en 26. “op zyn Rembrands of Lievensz., dat het sap ment with a pattern of “subtracted” white lines
boven; om de teederheid van zijn dag uitte- gelyk drek langs het stuk neer loope; maar on her right sleeve and shoulder. The highest
drukken neemtmen tusschen ’t swart en wit [contrary] gelyk en mals, dat uwe voorwerpen tops of the folds of the right sleeve are con-
wat ultramarijn of smalt. De schaduwe moet alleen door de konst rond en verheeven schij nected with a high sheen, in more or less oval
gloeyend zijn en getempert worden met swart nen en niet door kladdery”; “dat men zulke shapes, like snow on the tops of a mountain
en wat meer ligten oker als de sneeuw, en men schrandere geesten vind die door nieuwig ridge.
maakt de weersteutinge wat ligter als de heden eenig aanzien...zoeken te verkrijgen.
29. Lead white, carbon black, red ochre, and
schaduwe door wat wit, swart, ligten oker en Men heeft ’er verscheidene van dien aart sedert
umber in this painting were identified on the
een weynig vermilioen.” eenigen tyd gezien: doch ik zal ’er maar alleen-
basis of their optical characteristics by PLM;
lyk twee noemen, als Rembrand en Jan
21. Lead white was identified on the basis of its chemical composition was determined by MCA,
Lievensz”; “voor die een vaste hand en vlug
optical characteristics in polarized light followed by an SEM-EDS examination of a
penceel heeft, om zyn Concept met den eersten
microscopy (PLM); the identification of lead paint cross section.
te voltooien; ’t welk anders, zonder het eerst
and the carbonate was done by microchemical
te doodverwen niet kan geschieden.” G. de 30. Gaehtgens 1987, 433: “Dog zijne verkiesinge
analyses (MCA); and the perfect match of the
Lairesse, Groot Schilderboek, Waar in de Schil was na de moderne manier, (als die van Ter-
diffraction pattern of the sample with that of
derkonst in al haar deelen grondig werd onder burgh) om satijne rokjes en andere kleetjes
the PDF standard 13 – 131 was done by x-ray
weezen, ook door Redeneeringen en Prentver te vertoonen.”
diffraction (XRD). Further examination,
beeldingen verklaard, ed. Johannes Marshoorn,
including elemental analyses, was done 31. Leonardo da Vinci, Treatise on Painting
vol. 1 (Haarlem, 1740), 324.
with scanning electron microscopy equipped (Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270), trans. A. P.
with energy dispersive spectrometry of x-rays 27. This vertical panel has a rather wide wood McMahon (Princeton, 1956), 1:207.
(SEM-EDS). grain running in a horizontal direction, but
32. Angel 1642, 248.
lacks the conventional beveled edges. It has
22. T. Goedings and K. Groen, “A Seventeenth-
these features in common with the Rijks
Century Explanation of the Word ‘Schulpwit,’ ”
museum’s Helena van der Schalcke (cat. 14),
Bulletin of the Hamilton Kerr Institute, 2
the Seated Girl in Peasant Costume (28 × 23 cm,
(1994): 85 – 87.
inv. no. SK-A-4038), the Portrait of Jacob de
23. Examination with PLM showed the typical Graeff (45.5 × 34.5 cm, inv. no. SK-A-3963), and
whitish particles with moderate birefringence a Portrait of a Gentleman (23.7 × 17.8 cm, pri-
and conchoidal fracture, in a yellow matrix. vate collection). This deviation from common
XRD analysis showed a strong Fe fluorescence seventeenth-century practice may suggest that
in the pattern, but no distinct lines for any the wood for these panels is of local or West-
crystalline iron oxide pigments. The ochre is of phalian origin rather than from the Baltic
amorphous nature. The pattern showed a per- states, and that the panels were made by a local
fect match with that of PDF file 33 – 1161 for carpenter rather than a professional panel
maker (personal communication, Martin Bijl,
195 n o t e s t o p a g e s 3 7 – 4 0
Notes to the Catalogue 1 2 3
Horse and Rider The Consultation Procession with Flagellants
Provenance,
1633/1634, oil on canvas, 51.5 × 41 (20 @ × 16 ¡) 1635, oil on panel, 34.5 × 45.7 (13 ∞ × 18) c. 1636/1640, oil on panel, 41.5 × 71.5 (16 & × 28 ¡)
Exhibition History, On loan from a Private collection, Courtesy of the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin — Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam (1855)
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (WA LI 188) Gemäldegalerie (791C)
and references Provenance
Provenance Inscription N. Beets Gallery, Amsterdam, 1921; Mr. Hem-
(Gallery F.M.Z. Mathiessen, London, 1946 as Signed and dated, on tablecloth (G and T inter- lein (?); Israel Collection, Kassel; (J. Goudstik-
P. Palamedsz); Private collection, London; laced): G.T. Borch 1635 ker Gallery, Amsterdam, 1930); presented by
Mrs. M.A. Dunne, London, by 1959, private Goudstikker to the museum in 1930 on the
Provenance
collection occasion of the 10th exhibition of his collection
B.G. Roelofs (sale, Amsterdam, 2 April 1873,
Exhibitions no. 25); B. Suermondt, Aachen, acquired by at the Rotterdamse Kunstkring
None recorded museum in 1874 Exhibitions
Literature Exhibitions Amsterdam 1930, no. 60; Rome 1956 – 1957,
HdG 1907–1927, 5 (1913): 103, probably either no. The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 2 no. 294; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 3;
333 f or g; G 1959–1960, 1:177, repro.; 2:54, no. 2; Munich 1998 – 1999, no. 107
Literature
The Hague and Münster 1974, 48; Moiso- Literature
Staatliche Museen, Berlin 1911, no. 791c.; HdG
Diekamp 1987, 482–483, D 5 Bode 1925, 112 – 113, repro.; Hannema 1943, 100,
1907–1927, 5 (1913): 10–11, no. 8; Bode 1919, 103;
Notes Hannema 1943, 56, 97, 107 repro.; Plietzsch 151; Plietzsch 1944, 10, 39, repro.; G 1948, 44;
1. For this image, see Kettering 1988, 1:102, 1944, 38, no. 4; G 1959–1960, 1: 179, repro.; G 1959 – 1960, 1:35 – 37, 182, repro.; 2:57 – 58,
cat. GJr 18. 2:55–56, no. 4; Staatliche Museen, Berlin 1978, no. 7; Brown 1974, 291, repro.; Brown 1984, 214,
431, no. 791c, repro. 212, repro.; Kettering 1988, 1, 130; Cologne
2. G 1959–1960, 2:53–54, no. 1. Gudlaugsson 1991 – 1992, 197; Lammertse 1998, 20, 50
considered these two works to be pendants. Notes
1. For an excellent discussion of this issue, see Notes
Another version, now in the Museum of Fine
Dixon 1995, 75–79. 1. As quoted by Lammertse 1998, 21. The Diary
Arts, Boston (cat. 1, fig. 1), was not known by
of John Evelyn, ed. John Bowle (Oxford and
Gudlaugsson. It seems unlikely that any of
2. Documents indicate that Ter Borch became New York, 1985), 97.
these variations of this theme were intended to
a master in the Saint Luke’s Guild in Haarlem
be pendants even though two of these works 2. Flagellants are seen in Combat between
in 1635. Only after he had become a master
were apparently sold as a pair in Leiden in Carnival and Lent, a painting from the work-
would he have been permitted to sign and date
1770. See HdG 1907–1927, 5 (1913): 103, shop of Pieter Bruegel the Elder in the Museum
one of his paintings. See G 1959–1960, 2:15.
no. 333 f and g. of Fine Arts, Boston (49.82).
3. G 1959–1960, 1:30. Nevertheless, it is also
3. G 1959–1960, 2:54, no. 2. 3. This summary is taken from The Catholic
possible that the painting was in the possession
of one of Ter Borch’s patrons in Zwolle or Encyclopedia, 6, online edition, 2003. The entry
4. See, for example, Codde’s painting Two Sol
Deventer, where Netscher could have seen it. on “Flagellants” was written by Leslie A. St. L.
diers with a Woman in an Inn, 1633, Rijks-
Toke and transcribed by Douglas J. Potter. See
museum Twenthe, Enschede (0346), illustrated
4. Gudlaugsson in G 1959–1960, 2:55–56, no. 4, also Cologne 1991 – 1992, 194 – 197.
in Beelden van een strijd [exh. cat., Stedelijk
notes the stylistic connections between the
Museum Het Prinsenhof] (Delft, 1998), 337– 4. Bode 1925, 112 – 113, fig. 2.
still-life elements in this painting and works
338, no. 121.
by Teniers and De Heem. De Heem probably 5. Plietzsch 1944, 10.
5. G 1959–1960, 1:28. moved from Leiden to Antwerp in the early
1630s. He became a member of the Saint Luke’s 6. G 1959 – 1960, 2:57 – 58, no. 7. For a discussion
Guild in Antwerp in the guild year 1635–1636. of this painting, see Cologne 1991 – 1992,
194 – 197, no. 19.5.
5. For an English transcription of this letter, see
page 189 and Kettering 1988, 2:864. 7. Houbraken 1753, 3:34. For a discussion of Ter
Borch’s travels, see the essay by Wheelock.
6. Ter Borch’s mother, Anna Bufkens, had been
born in Antwerp, and her brother Aert still 8. Gerard the Elder’s letter, dated 3 July 1635,
lived there. Another of her brothers, Thomas recommends that Gerard the Younger paint
de Bonte, who lived in Kampen in 1635, became “modern” scenes, in which figural groups, simi-
Ter Borch’s guardian. See Houck 1899, 98, and lar to those found in daily life, were portrayed
G 1959–1960, 2:47.
196 n o t e s t o p a g e s 4 4 – 5 2
with a sense of movement. For discussions 5 6 7
of this letter, see page 189 and essays by
Wheelock, Kettering, and Wallert. Portrait of a Man Portrait of a Woman Horsemen in front of an Inn
c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #) c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #) Peter Molijn and Gerard ter Borch
9. Lammertse 1998, 21.
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, The Adolph D. Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, The Adolph D. c. 1643/1645, oil on panel, 43.5 × 58.5 (17 ¡ × 23 %)
10. Lammertse 1998, 21. and Wilkins C. Williams Fund (49-11-26) and Wilkins C. Williams Fund (49 - 11 - 27) Gemäldegalerie der Akademie der Bildenden Künste,
Vienna (730)
Provenance Provenance
C. Marchand, Paris, 1901; (Charles Sedelmeyer, C. Marchand, Paris, 1901; (Charles Sedelmeyer, Inscription
4 Paris, 1901); Marquis de Ganay, Paris (sale Paris, 1901); Marquis de Ganay, Paris (sale Signed, top left: P/Molyn
Portrait of a Man [Mme la Marquise de Ganay, née Ridgeway], [Mme la Marquise de Ganay, née Ridgeway], Provenance
Paris [Georges Petit], 8–10 May 1922, no. 29); Paris [Georges Petit], 8–10 May 1922, no. 28); Bequest of Count Anton Lamberg, 1821, with
c. 1639/1640, oil on copper, 48.6 × 35.7 (19 ¡ × 14 %) (F. Mont, New York); Mr. and Mrs. Adolph D. (F. Mont, New York); Mr. and Mrs. Adolph D.
Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Gift of George an attribution of the figures to Tilberg [Gillis
Williams Williams van Tilborch the Younger (1625 – 1678)]
T. Cameron (52.31)
Exhibitions Exhibitions Exhibitions
Inscription
The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 5a; Phoenix The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 5b; Phoenix Brussels 1977 – 1978, 58 – 59
Signed, lower right: G T B
1998, no. 4 1998, no. 4
Provenance Literature
Literature Literature G 1959 – 1960, 1:208, repro.; 2:70 – 71, no. 35;
([Possibly] sale d’Albe, Paris [Constantin],
Sedelmeyer Gallery 1901, no. 49; Dreyfus 1909, Sedelmeyer Gallery 1901, no. 48; Dreyfus 1909, Trnek 1992, 273 – 278, no. 91; Trnek 1997,
26 February 1825, lot 22).* Private collection,
4; HdG 1907–1927, 5 (1913): 100–101, no. 322; 4; HdG 1907–1927, 5 (1913): 123, no. 403; G 1959– 136 – 137
Germany?† (Newhouse Galleries and Frederick
G 1959–1960, 1:41, 190, repro.; 2:61–62, no. 16; 1960, 1:41, 191 repro.; 2:62, no. 17; Virginia
Mont, New York, 1952); Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Notes
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts 1966, 58; Near Museum of Fine Arts 1966, 58; Near 1985, 442;
George T. Cameron 1. See, for example, Esaias van de Velde’s Three
1985, 442; Kettering 1999a, 52 Kettering 1999a, 52
Exhibitions Riders before a Tent, 1622, illustrated in George
Notes Notes S. Keyes, Esaias van den Velde 1587 – 1630
San Francisco, Toledo, and Boston 1966–1967,
1. In addition to the paintings included in this 1. De Winkel 1998, 330. (Doornspijk, 1984), fig. 230.
no. 23
exhibition, see G 1959–1960, 2: nos. 13, 14, 15,
2. Oil on panel, 30 x 23.2 cm; sale, New York 2. See also G 1959 – 1960, 2:69 – 70, no. 34. Gud-
Literature 38, 39, 40, 44, 45, 48, 52, 55, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64,
(Christie’s), 26 January 2001, no. 124 (as Por laugsson also notes (G 1959 – 1960, 2:71) that in
G 1959–1960, 1:41 – 42, 192, repro.; 2:62, no. 18; 135, 136, 150, 151, 173, 198, 228, 263, 267, 268,
trait of a Man and Portrait of a Woman); 1647 the artist Jan van Goyen acquired a paint-
Saint Petersburg and Atlanta 1975, 34; and 287.
G 1959–1960, 2: nos. 32 and 33. An identifica- ing at auction that had been painted by Molijn
Haverkamp-Begemann 1980, 206, 211 note 17;
2. See Phoenix 1998, especially Edgar Peters tion for the subjects in the present portrait and and Ter Borch. The work fetched fifty guilders,
Kettering 1999a, 52; Lynn F. Orr in San Fran-
Bowron, “A Brief History of European Oil its pendant may eventually be found among the second highest price in the sale.
cisco 1999, 81
Paintings on Copper, 1560 – 1775,” 9–30. members of this extended Haarlem family
Notes (Van der Schalcke/Bardoel), who appear to 3. Since Ter Borch was no longer a member of
* Described in the sale catalogue as “Un petit 3. Although one might expect just the opposite, the Haarlem Saint Luke’s Guild in the early
have been among Ter Borch’s most consistent
portrait en pied, d’homme vêtu de noir, se the use of copper (or other metal supports) is 1640s, the collaboration could only have
early patrons. See cat. 14.
détachant sur un fond clair. Ce morceau est actually comparatively rare among works by occurred if Molijn invited Ter Borch to execute
d’une belle qualité. Cuivre, 18 × 12 p[ouces].” fine painters in the latter part of the seven- 3. G 1959–1960, 2:61, no. 14. the work with him.
teenth century; see Bowron, “A Brief History,”
† Although the history of the picture prior to 4. Gaskell 1990, 156. 4. Trnek 1992, 276 – 277.
in Phoenix 1998, 25. It may have been regarded
its appearance on the New York art market is as a mark of virtuosic achievement for a 5. Gaskell 1990, 156, conjectured that this
not known, there is a Berlin customs stamp on painter to be able to re-create the enamel-like might be a mourning bonnet; if so, it might
the reverse of the copper panel. surface of a copper panel on a more porous, conceivably have been added upon the death of
1. On the occurrence of this gesture in (Dutch) irregular support such as canvas or wood. the man depicted in the pendant.
male portraiture of the sixteenth and seven- 4. G 1959–1960, 2:60–61.
teenth centuries, see Joaneath Spicer, “The
Renaissance Elbow,” in Bremmer and Rooden- 5. Gaskell 1990, 156.
burg 1991, 84–128, especially 97–100.
2. See, for example, Plietzsch 1961, 137–138.
3. See Adams 1985, 1:223–225.
4. Musée du Louvre, Paris (1730), oil on panel,

33 × 27 cm.
197 n o t e s t o p a g e s 5 2 – 6 0
8 10 12 13
Adriaen Pauw van Heemstede Godard van Reede van Nederhorst Don Caspar de Bracamonte y The Swearing of the Oath of
c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.2 (6 * × 4 ¶) c. 1646, oil on copper, 15 × 11 (5 ¢ × 4 &) Guzman, Count of Peñaranda Ratification of the Treaty of Münster,
Collection Pauw van Wieldrecht, On loan to Frans Hals Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (SK-A-3842) 15 May 1648
1647/1648, oil on copper, 10.5 × 9 (4 ¡ × 3 ∞)
Museum, Haarlem (OS 92-195)
Provenance Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam (2529)
1648, oil on copper, 45.4 × 58.5 (17 ¢ × 23 %)
F. C. C. Baron van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Slot Provenance The National Gallery, London (NG 896)
9 [castle] Zuylen, Oud-Zuilen; acquired by the Pasteur Kremer Collection, Paris; E. Warneck Inscription
Rijksmuseum in 1952 Collection, Paris; (sale, Paris, 27 – 28 May 1926,
Anna van Ruytenburgh, Wife of Signed and dated: G.T.Borch F.Monasterij
Exhibitions no. 14); J. Goudstikker, Amsterdam; D.G. van A 1648
Adriaen Pauw Beuningen Collection, Rotterdam, later Vier-
Delft 1948, no. 430; The Hague 1998, 28, no. 6;
c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.5 (6 * × 4 •) houten; acquired by Museum Boymans-van Provenance
Münster and Osnabrück 1998, no. 620
Collection Pauw van Wieldrecht, On loan to Frans Hals Beuningen, Rotterdam, from Collection of D.G. Hendrik ter Borch, [burgomaster of Deventer]
Museum, Haarlem (OS 92-196) Literature 1672 – 1674; by descent to his son, Bernard
van Beuningen in 1958
G 1959 – 1960, 1:58, 216, repro.; 2:77 – 78, no. 47; Heidentrijck ter Borch, Deventer; a descendent
Provenance Van der Goes and De Meyere 1996, 69 – 70; Exhibitions of the latter; Van Leyden, Amsterdam; (sale,
Mr. M. J. Ridder Pauw van Wieldrecht, Faber and De Bruin 1998 The Hague 1903, no. 7; Paris 1911, no. 155; Lon- Van Leyden, Paris, November 1804, no. 91); de
Broekhuizen, 1909; Jonkvrouwe E. Elias Pauw don 1929, no. 502; Amsterdam 1929, no. 144; La Roche; probably Chevalier de Lespinasse de
van Wieldrecht, Keston Park, Farnborough, Rotterdam 1938, no. 151; Delft 1948, no. 415; Langeac (c. 1750 – 1842). Prince de Talleyrand,
Kent 11 Paris 1952, no. 122; Rotterdam 1955, no. 127; Paris, June 1814, in sale catalogue, 9 July 1817,
Exhibitions The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 14; The lot 38, though the sale never took place;
Caspar van Kinschot Hague 1998, 33, no. 2; Münster and Osnabrück
The Hague and Münster 1974, nos. 8a, 8b; The William Buchanan, Paris?, 1817; Duc de Berry,
Hague 1998, nos. 3, 4; Münster and Osnabrück 1646/1647, oil on copper, 11 × 8 (4 & × 3 ¡) 1998, no. 621 Paris?, 1833, in a private sale, London, April
1998, nos. 616, 617 Private collection, On long-term loan to the Royal 1834, no. 69; (sale, Duchesse de Berry, Paris,
Literature
Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague (1050)
Literature HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 87, no. 256; Plietzsch 4 – 6 April 1837, lot 1); bought by Octave Taunez
Moes 1897 – 1905, nos. 5169, 6651; HdG Provenance 1944, no. 23; G 1959 – 1960, 1:61, 222, repro.; 2:81, for Prince Anatole Demidoff, San Donato,
1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 86, no. 254; G 1959 – 1960, Van Kinschot collection, Leiden; on loan from no. 56; Ekkart 1995, no. 4; Israel 1997, 100; Florence; (sale, Prince Anatole Demidoff, Paris,
1:52, 213, repro.; 2:73 – 74, nos. 41, 42; Duch- a private collector since 1975 Dethlefs 1998, 203 18 April 1868, lot 18); 4th Marquess of Hertford;
hardt 1998, 142; The Hague 1998, 25 – 26; by descent in 1879 to Sir Richard Wallace; The
Exhibitions
Kettering 1998, 610, repro. National Gallery, London, 1871
The Hague 1890, no. 15; Rotterdam, 1910, no.
Notes 533; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 12; The Exhibitions
1. Pauw was awarded the medal of the French Hague 1998, 28 – 29, no. 11; Münster and Stockholm 1966, 159, no. 266; The Hague and
Order of Saint Michael during an official visit Osnabrück 1998, no. 618 Münster 1974, no. 15; London 1976, no. 11; The
to France in 1624. The French lily attaches to Hague 1998, no. 1; Münster and Osnabrück
Literature
the medal. For Pauw’s right to add the French 1998, no. 615
Moes 1897 – 1905, no. 4192; HdG 1907 – 1927,
lily and English rose to his coat of arms, see 5 (1913): 82, no. 240; G 1959 – 1960, 1:59, 219,
Van Nierop 1993, 213 – 214. repro.; 2:79, no. 51; Israel 1997, 97 – 98
2. See Stiglic 1998, 391. Notes

1. G 1959 – 1960, 2:79, no. 51; The Hague and
Münster 1974, 76 – 77.
198 n o t e s t o p a g e s 6 3 – 6 8
Literature 14 4. Rudi Ekkart in Haarlem and Antwerp 2000, thank Adriaan Waiboer for bringing it to my
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 115 – 116, no. 1; 9 136, citing Bob Haak, “Het portret van Pompe- attention.
(1842): 529, no. 2; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 9, Helena van der Schalcke jus Occo door Dirck Jacobsz.,” Bulletin van het
† The painting can be identified by a small
no. 6; G 1959 – 1960, 1:64 – 68, 223, repro.; 2: c. 1648, oil on panel, 34 × 28.5 (13 ™ × 11 @) Rijksmuseum 6 (1958): 35.
drawing made in the border of the sales cata-
81 – 85, no. 57; MacLaren 1960, 35 – 41, no. 896; Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (SK-A-1786)
5. Saskia Kuus, “Children’s Costume in the logue by Gabriel de Saint-Aubin. See Émile
MacLaren and Brown 1991, 34 – 39, no. 896;
Provenance Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,” in Dacier, Catalogue de ventes et livrets de salons
Ekkart 1995, no. 4; Dethlefs 1996; Israel 1997;
Agneta Eichelberg, daughter of the sitter; by Haarlem and Antwerp 2000, 77. illustrés par Gabriel de Saint-Aubin (Paris,
Demoed 1998, 1 – 5; Dethlefs 1998, 166 – 172;
descent to Hendrick Christiaan Kleinpenning 1919), 59. In the sale the painting was misattrib-
Kaulbach 1998, 593, 601; Kettering 1998, 6. See G 1959–1960, 2:68, and The Hague and
(1834–1904), Amsterdam; (Antiquair Francke, uted to “G. Bouth.” I would like to thank
605 – 614 Münster 1974, 60.
Amsterdam); purchased with the aid of the Anneke Wertheim for discovering this refer-
Notes Rembrandt Society, 1898 7. Ekkart in Haarlem and Antwerp 2000, 168. ence.
1. The Latin account provided by the poet
Exhibitions 1. Gudlaugsson, in G 1959 – 1960, 1:69; 2:83, 89,
and jurist Dr. Johannes Cools, often cited
The Hague 1924, no. 12; London 1929, no. 218; no. 68, identifies this figure in reference to a
by art historians, including Gudlaugsson in
Rotterdam 1947, no. 10; The Hague and Mün-
15
figure in the painting’s purported pendant,
G 1959 – 1960 and MacLaren and Brown 1991,
ster 1974, no. 6; Amsterdam 2000, no. 112; Scene in an Inn Encouragement to Drink.
provides considerably less detail than the
Haarlem and Antwerp 2000–2001, no. 48
description published by the historian Lieuwe c. 1648/1650, oil on panel, 24.7 × 18.4 (9 # × 7 @) 2. G 1959 – 1960, 2:90, associates the costume
van Aitsema in 1650. See The Hague 1998, Literature Private collection with the theater. The young man’s costume,
15 – 17; Kettering 1998, 605 – 606. HdG 1907–1927, 5 (1913): 89, no. 267; Plietzsch however, also has associations with musicians
Inscription
1944, 39, no. 10; G 1959–1960,1:47–48, 204, in paintings by Georges de La Tour (1593 – 1652).
2. Although Ter Borch only included six pleni- Signed, on the edge of the table: GTB
repro.; 2:68–69, no. 30; Bol 1962, no. 32; See, in particular, the musician on the right in
potentiaries, the Dutch delegation actually Kruimel 1971; Van Thiel 1976, 130 Provenance The Musicians’ Brawl, c. 1625 – 1627, The J. Paul
comprised eight representatives who all even- Possibly collection of Johan van Slijpestijn,
Notes Getty Museum, Los Angeles; illustrated in
tually ratified the treaty. Nederhorst of Utrecht Utrecht, 1693 (inventory, 26 September 1693,
1. For Van der Schalcke family genealogy, see Philip Conisbee, Georges de La Tour and His
was too sick to attend the ratification ceremony no. 70);* (sale, The Hague, 24 April 1737, no.
Kruimel 1971, 224–229, and Kruimel 1971, 237– World [exh. cat., National Gallery of Art]
(see cat. 10) and the delegate from Zeeland 20); (Prince de Conti, sale, Paris, 15 March 1779,
254. Prior to Kruimel’s research, Helena’s par- (Washington, 1996), 53, no. 9.
stayed away because of his province’s objec- no. 180);† R. Mège de Malmont, Paris; (Charles
tions to the treaty. A few weeks later, Zeeland ents had long been identified as the preacher
Sedelmeyer, Paris, by 1901); A. Schloss, Paris 3. G 1959 – 1960, 2:89 – 90, nos. 68 and 69. See
did agree to publish the peace. See Israel 1982, Hendricus Schalkenius (Hendrik van der
(sale, Paris, 25 May 1949, no. 60); Dr. H. Wetz- the note on Slijpestijn in the provenance.
374. Schalcke, younger brother of Gerard) and his
lar, Amsterdam (until 1976); private collection 4. See Antwerp 1991, 145 – 147, nos. 46A, 46B.
wife, Alida van den Heuvel.
3. See also the highly finished, miniaturistic Ter Borch could claim a remote connection Exhibitions
5. Although Gudlaugsson in G 1959 – 1960, 2:90
paintings that Ter Borch produced of various to his sitters; Suzannah Molijn, sister of his Laren 1959, no. 79; Münster and The Hague
has noted that the simple wooden table is not
participants in the negotiations, many of them Haarlem master Pieter Molijn, married Gerard 1974, no. 17
characteristic of those seen in Dutch art but is
engraved, either at the artist’s or the sitter’s van der Schalcke’s uncle, Hendrik Cornelis van
Literature found in French genre scenes of the seven-
request (cats. 8 – 11). der Schalcke, in 1637 (see Kruimel 1971, 254).
Sedelmeyer Gallery 1901, 60, no. 50; HdG teenth century, I have been unable to find an
4. G 1959 – 1960, 1:67 – 68 and Houbraken 1753, 2. G 1959–1960, 2:68, nos. 28 and 29 (as por- 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 73, no. 198, which is identi- equivalent table in any work of art from the
3:40. traits of Hendrik van der Schalcke and his cal with HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 36, no. 89 and period. In any event, it must be based on an
wife). 39, no. 98a; Wetzlar 1952, no. 79; G 1959 – 1960, actual table, closely observed by the artist.
5. Its accessibility to Ter Borch’s family mem-
1:69, 231, repro.; 2:89 – 90, no. 69; Jager 1985,
bers is indicated by the copy one of them made 3. Both oil on panel, 30 × 23.2 cm; sale, New 6. Gaskell 1984, 119 – 121.
20, repro.
of the Count of Peñaranda, exactly as he York (Christie’s), 26 January 2001, no. 124 (as
7. Renger 1986, 35 – 38.
appears in the center of the painting. See Portrait of a Man and Portrait of a Woman); Notes
Kettering 1988, 730. G 1959–1960, 2: nos. 32 and 33. The portraits * The inventory of Slijpestijn’s collection, dated 8. Jacob Cats, Silenus Alcibiadis, sive, Proteus
are listed in the inventory of Johan Bardoel’s 26 September 1693, includes on page 4, item 70, (Amsterdam, 1620), part 1, 25, emblem 12,
estate, 20 February 1663: “2 contrefeytsels van the following reference: “Twee conterfeytsels “Van roock werd ick ghevoedt” (I was fed with
ter Burch van Jan Bardoel en syn huisvrou verbeeldende de reuck en smaeck” (Two por- smoke). The English translation of this emblem
Maria Wibouts f. 25:—:— ” (Archiefdienst voor traits depicting Smell and Taste). The painting is taken from Nevitt 2003, 94.
Kennemerland, Haarlem, NAH 222, folio 211); identified as “reuck” may well be this work. For
9. Mattoon M. Curtis, The Book of Snuff and
see Pieter Biesboer, Collections of Paintings in a discussion of its connection to a painting
Snuff Boxes (New York, 1935), 30 – 40.
Haarlem, 1572–1745, ed. Carol Togneri (Los depicting “Taste,” see the catalogue text. The
Angeles, 2001) 127. provenance reference is found in the Getty
Provenance Index Database; I would like to
199 n o t e s t o p a g e s 7 2 – 8 0
16 8. Just shortly before 1650, Ter Borch seems to 568; Liedtke 2000, 104, 118, 237 – 238, repro.; 18
have executed a similar composition, more Strouse 2000, 31, repro.; New York and London
Woman at a Mirror obvious in its narrative and more moralizing 2001, 17 – 18, 151, 161, 163, 384; Franits 2001, 2 – 3; The Reading Lesson
1650, oil on panel, 34 × 26 (13 ™ × 10 @) in its point; the painting is known today only Liedtke forthcoming c. 1652, oil on panel, 27 × 25 (10 £ × 9 ¶)
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (SK-A-4039) through copies (G 1959 – 1960, 2:95 – 96, no. 76). Musée du Louvre, Paris, Département des Peintures,
Notes
There the maid is presented in the act of comb- Legs la Caze, 1869 (MI 1006)
Provenance * In part because of Jan Steen’s quotation of
ing her mistress’ hair while the mistress herself Inscription
(Sale, Amsterdam, 19 July 1826, no. 54 [sold to the young woman from the present painting
gazes on what looks like a watch rather than at Signed (traces), on back of chair: GT
De Vries]). (Sale, Rotterdam, 26 April 1830, no. in a work from the 1650s (Instituut Collectie
her reflection in the mirror, which is invisible.
68 [sold to Lamme]). (Sir George Donaldson, Nederland, on loan to Centraal Museum, Provenance
London). Albert Lehmann, Paris; (sale, Paris, Utrecht), Gudlaugsson considered the possibil- Louis La Caze [1798 – 1869], Paris;* bequeathed
12 June 1925, no. 289); R. Schumann, Paris; E. ity that Steen’s father-in-law, Jan van Goyen,
Nicolas, Paris; J. de Bruijn, Muri; presented to
17 owned the present panel or sold it on Ter
by him to the Louvre, 1869
Borch’s behalf (G 1959 – 1960, 2:99). Exhibitions

the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, by Mr. and Ms. A Young Woman at Her Toilet The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 26
I. De Bruijn-van der Leeuw, Muri, 1961
with a Maid 1. I am grateful to Walter Liedtke for making
Exhibitions Literature
available the text of his unpublished entry on
c. 1650 /1651, oil on wood, 47.6 × 34.6 (18 # × 13 £) La Caze 1871, no. 145; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913):
Paris 1911, no. 150; Bern 1943, no. 55; Basel 1945, this picture, to be included in the forthcoming
Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 40, no. 104; Plietzsch 1944, no. 41; G 1959 – 1960,
no. 97; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 21 Gift of J. Pierpont Morgan, 1917 (17.190.10) catalogue of Dutch paintings in the Metropoli-
1:96, 130, 257, repro.; 2:108 – 109, no. 98; Brejon
Literature tan Museum of Art.
Provenance* de Lavergnée et al. 1979, 30; Naumann 1981,
HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 24, no. 52 (which Blondel de Gagny, Paris (sale, Paris, 10 – 24 2. See G 1959 – 1960, 1:83, and others; as Nau- 1:66; Durantini 1983, 102; Frankfurt 1993 – 1994,
is identical with 27, no. 64); Plietzsch 1944, December 1776, no. 73); (Lebrun, Paris; sale, mann points out, however (in Philadelphia, 252, repro.
fig. 20; G 1959 – 1960, 1:79 – 81, 243, repro.; 2:101, Paris, 19 January 1778); Villers (sale, Paris [Le Berlin, and London 1984, 239), Ter Borch does
no. 83; De Jongh 1967, 76 – 78; Stone-Ferrier Notes
Brun], 30 March 1812, no. 44 to Bernardeau]); not seem to have produced another such “high-
1985, 172 * In 1869, Louis La Caze (1798 – 1869)
Monsieur L. Lapeyrière (sale, Paris, 14 ff. April life” genre scene until the so-called Paternal
bequeathed his collection of more than 260
Notes 1817, no. 60 [to Vas; bt. in?]); (sale, Paris, 19 ff. Admonition of about 1655 (see cat. 27).
paintings to the Louvre. A doctor of relatively
1. G 1959 – 1960, 2:99 – 100, no. 81, and 102, no. 85 April 1825, no. 164); Théodore Patureau (sale,
3. Sale, Paris (Drouot), 13 December 1988, no. modest means, he purchased paintings cheaply
respectively. For a discussion of Rembrandt’s Paris, 20 – 21 April 1857, no. 40 [to Leroy]);
26; G 1959 – 1960, 2: 96, no. 77. at auction or from dealers in secondhand
use of family members, focusing on Saskia, see Vicomte Bernard du Bus de Gisignies [1808 –
goods; as a consequence the provenance of
Dickey 2002. 1874], Brussels (sale, Brussels, 9 – 10 May 1882, 4. On the mirror as an indicator of vanitas, see
these pictures prior to 1869 can rarely be docu-
no. 78 [to Thibaudeau]); Léopold Goldschmidt, Amsterdam 1976, 192, and more generally,
2. Compare, too, Gesina’s own self-portraits in mented.
Paris, 1898; Rodolphe Kann, Paris, by 1900; his Alain Tapié et al., Les Vanités dans la peinture
Kettering 1988, 2:483, folio 2, recto, and 682, au XVIIe siècle: méditations sur la richesse, le 1. See Durantini 1983, 93 – 130.
estate, 1905 – 1907; (Duveen, Paris and New
folio 8, recto. dénuement et la redemption [exh. cat., Musée
York, 1907; J. Pierpont Morgan, New York
2. G 1959 – 1960, 2:108. An engraving of Gram-
3. See the essay of Arie Wallert in this volume (1907 – 1913; his estate, 1913 – 1917); Gift of J. des Beaux-Arts] (Caen, 1990). On the basin and
matica, 1565, by Cornelis Cort after Frans
for the “modern” method of handling paint in Pierpont Morgan, 1917 ewer as a symbol of purity or innocence in
Floris — see Manfred Sellink, Cornelis Cort,
the satin (especially page 38 – 41). Dutch art, see A. Elizabeth Snoep-Rietsma,
Exhibitions ‘consitch plaet snijder van Hoorne in Holland’ /
“De waterzuchtige vrouw van Gerard Dou en de
4. G 1959 – 1960, 2:101, no. 83, De Jongh 1967, 76, Madrid 2003, no. 1 ‘accomplished plate-cutter from Hoorn in Hol
betekenis van de lampetkan,” in Album Amico
and The Hague and Münster 1974, 98. De Jongh land’ [exh. cat., Museum Boymans-van Beun-
Literature rum J. G. van Gelder, ed. Joshua Bruyn et al.
illustrates an image by Roemer Visscher of a ingen] (Rotterdam, 1994), 124, repro. — pro-
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 124, no. 19 (as “The (The Hague, 1973), 285 – 292; and Eric-Jan
girl gazing at herself in a mirror and interprets vided direct inspiration for the figures of a
Toilet”); Bode 1900, no. 17, repro.; Kann 1907, Sluijter, “‘Een stuck waerin een jufr. voor de
the painting by Ter Borch in light of this and mother instructing a child in Cornelis de
1: no. 86; Nicolle 1908, 197; Hellens 1911, 66 – 68, spiegel van Gerrit Douw,’” Antiek 23 (1988):
other emblems of transience. Man’s Reading Lesson (c. 1680s, canvas, for-
125; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 23, no. 50 (as with 150 – 161.
merly with Hoogsteder Fine Arts, The Hague
5. The print is attributed, alternatively, to Cor- Duveen); Burroughs 1931, 353; Plietzsch 1944,
5. As noted by Liedtke, forthcoming. [1989]).
nelis Visscher and Th. Matham (Hollstein 42). 51, under no. 73; G 1959 – 1960, 1:83, 240, repro.;
2:23 note 7, 98 – 99, no. 80; Westers 1961, 94 – 95, 3. For example, Gerard Dou’s Night School of
6. Titian’s famous Venus before the Mirror was repro.; Haverkamp-Begemann 1965, 39, repro.; about 1663 (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam), or his
copied many times in this period, by Rubens Naumann 1981, 1:68; Philadelphia, Berlin, and portrait historié of Prince Rupert von der Pfalz
and Van Dyck, among others. See Sluijter London 1984, 151 note 1, 239; Sutton 1986, 187, and His Tutor, about 1631 (The J. Paul Getty
2000, 112. repro.; Kettering 1993/1997, 117 note 14, 121 Museum, Los Angeles). For Steen’s more jaun-
7. Sluijter 2000, 90 – 97. note 62; Baetjer 1995, 323; Blankert 1995 – 1996, diced take on the subject, see Wouter Kloek in
40, repro.; Kettering 1996, 382; Strouse 1999,
200 n o t e s t o p a g e s 8 1 – 8 7
Washington and Amsterdam 1996, 212 – 215, Giltaij 1994, 113; London and Hartford 1998, 20 3. Franits 1993, 30.
with additional citations. 73 – 74, 134; Madrid 2003, 98
Woman Spinning 4. See the many examples cited and illustrated
4. Pen and brush with brown ink, 137 × 145 mm; Notes in Schipper-van Lottum 1975; Stone-Ferrier
1. Broos 1987, 74, identified the child in Ter c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 34.5 × 27.5 (13 ∞ × 10 ¶)
Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Kupferstichkabi- 1985, 84 – 95; and Franits 1993, 71 – 76, among
Willem van der Vorm Foundation, Museum Boijmans Van
nett (2680). On this drawing as an allegory of Borch’s painting as a boy, based on the smock. others.
Beuningen, Rotterdam (VdV 4)
Ingenium, see Hessel Miedema, “Over het
2. Gerard Dou, Old Woman Delousing a Boy, 5. Franits 1993, 73, 128; G 1959 – 1960, 1:87, also
realisme in de Nederlandse schilderkunst van Inscription
c. 1650, Private collection, The Netherlands; positioned the two paintings between portrai-
de zeventiende eeuw,” Oud Holland 89 (1975): Signed and dated: GTB 1653
Pieter de Hooch, A Mother and a Child with Its ture and genre painting.
2 – 18; for a more moderated interpretation see Provenance
Head in Her Lap, c. 1658 – 1660, Rijksmuseum,
Jacques de Gheyn II Drawings [exh. cat., Dr. Jan Tak, Leiden [by 1779] (sale, Zoeter- 6. See cat. 19 for a discussion of the relationship
Amsterdam (C 149); and Jan Miel, Old Woman
Museum Boymans-van Beuningen] (Rotter- woude, 5 September 1781, no. 16); Abraham between the two paintings.
Delousing a Child, c. 1640s, etching (Hollstein
dam, 1985), 64 – 65. Delfos, Leiden [1731 – 1820]. (Sale, J. A. Bennet,
12). For Sweerts’ depictions of the theme, see 7. Both drawings are illustrated in Giltaij 1994,
5. Oil on panel, 29.2 × 21.6 cm, private collec- Kultzen 1996, nos. 24, 27, 28, and 34. Other Leiden [van der Hoek], 1 – 7 April 1829, no. 52). 115.
tion, United States. For the comparison, see artists such as Caspar Netscher also repre- Sir Francis Cook [by 1902]; Sir Frederick Cook,
G 1959 – 1960, 2:108; Naumann 1981, 1:66, and sented mothers combing a child’s hair (Moth Doughty House, Richmond; Sir Herbert Cook,
Bettina Werche, in Frankfurt 1993 – 1994, 252. er’s Pride, 1669, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, Doughty House, Richmond; (D. Katz, Dieren, 21
A 293), but there is little in the presentation of by 1940); Willem van der Vorm, Rotterdam
these elegant scenes to suggest that they were [purchased 4 March 1940] Jan van Goyen
19 also searching for lice. Exhibitions c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 20 × 16 (7 ¢ × 6 &)
London 1895, no. 107; London 1902, no. 184; Collections of the Prince of and in Liechtenstein, Vaduz
Woman Combing a Child’s Hair 3. Roemer Visscher, Sinnepoppen (Amsterdam,
(GE 893)
1614), part 1, no. 9; and “Kem, kem u menig- London 1938, no. 275; Rotterdam 1950 – 1951,
c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 33.5 × 29 (13 ^ × 11 *) no. 95; Zurich 1953, no. 151; Rotterdam 1955, Inscription
mael, en niet het hair alleen, Maer ook dat
Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague (744) no. 125; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 25; Signed, bottom right: GTB
binnen schuylt, tot aen het innigh been,” Jacob
Inscription Cats, Spiegel van den ouden ende nieuwen tijdt Amsterdam 1976, no. 3; Madrid 2003, no. 2
Provenance
Signed (illegible), on chair back: GTB (Amsterdam, 1658), 173. See Snoep-Reitsma Literature Michiel van Musscher (1645 – 1705), Amster-
Provenance 1973, 288; also Amsterdam 1976, 197, and Phila- Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 125, no. 24; Cook dam.* Jan van der Marck, Leiden (sale, Amster-
(Sale, J. van Bergen van der Grijp et al., Zoeter- delphia, Berlin, and London 1984, 158. 1905, 30, repro.; HdG (1907 – 1927), 5 (1913): dam, 25 August 1773, no. 413 [as by Bar-
woude, 25 June 1784); Abraham Delfos, Leiden 29 – 30, no. 73 and 58, no. 159; Kronig 1914, tolomeus van der Helst]); Nicolaas Nieuhoff,
4. Johan de Brune, Banket-werk van goede
[1731 – 1820]; (sale, H. Rottermond, Amsterdam, no. 218, repro.; Brockwell 1922, 48; Bode 1923, Amsterdam (sale, Amsterdam, Van der Schley,
gedagten (Middelburg, 1660), 2:319: “Een slacke
18 July 1786). (Sale, Dorothée Henriette Marie 105, repro.; Brockwell 1932, 39 no. 218, repro.; 14 – 17 April 1777, no. 68 [as by Bartolomeus
moeder, luyzige hoofden”; cited in Amsterdam
Louise Baroness de Pagniet, Utrecht, 26 July Plietzsch 1944, 14, no. 39; Hannema 1950, van der Helst]). G. Mailand, Paris (sale, Paris,
1976, 199.
1836, no. 32,); Steengracht van Duivenvoorde, no. 95, fig. 11; Hannema 1958, no. 4, fig. 7; 2 May 1881, no. 125); E. May, Paris (sale, Paris,
The Hague [from 1836 – 1913] (sale, Paris 5. See E. de Jongh in Amsterdam 1997, 257 – 259. G 1959 – 1960, 1:87 – 88, 89, 255, repro.; 2:107, Georges Petit, 4 June 1890, no. 126); (Charles
[Georges Petit], 9 June 1913, no. 17); purchased no. 96; Hannema 1962, no. 4, fig. 27; De Jongh Sedelmeyer, Paris, 1890?); acquired 1890
6. G 1959 – 1960, 1:88; 2:106 – 107; The Hague and
with the aid of the Vereniging Rembrandt 1967, 65, fig. 50; Schipper-van Lottum 1975, by Fürst Johannes II for the Liechtenstein
Münster 1974, 104, 106; E. de Jongh in Amster-
137 – 163; Stone-Ferrier 1985, 88, 92; Moiso- collection
Exhibitions dam 1976, 41; and Franits 1993, 73, among
Diekamp 1987, 481 – 482; Honig in Leiden 1988,
Amsterdam 1913, no. 6; The Hague and Mün- others. The themes of spinning and combing a Exhibitions
81; Franits 1993, 73 – 76, 128; Giltaij 1994,
ster 1974, no. 24; Paris 1986, no. 13 child’s hair are in fact both represented in Lucern 1948, no. 204; Basel 1987, no. 21; Leiden
113 – 115; Sutton in London and Hartford 1998,
Brekelenkam’s Old Woman Combing a Child’s 1996 – 1997, no. 59
Literature 73; Wieseman 2002, 56
Hair (cat. 19, fig. 1).
Bode 1883, 188; Geffroy 1900, 130, repro.; Literature
Notes
Martin 1913a, 10 – 11; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 7. Moiso-Diekamp 1987, 481 – 482. Bode 1894, 88; Sedelmeyer Gallery 1898, no. 221
1. “Sy wort door enckel lust tot spinnen aenge-
21 – 22, no. 46; Martin 1914, 10 – 12; Martin (as previously sold); Höss 1908, 56; HdG
8. Broos 1987, 76. dreven; / Sy maeckt dat haer gesin de spille
1935, 31; Plietzsch 1944, 43, no. 37; Bruyn 1959; 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 79 – 80, no. 227; Bredius
drayen kan / Ten goede van het huys, ten dien-
G 1959 – 1960, 1:88, 254, repro.; 2:106 – 107, 1915 – 1922, 3 (1917): 990; Bode 1923, 165; Liech-
ste vanden man” in Jacob Cats, Houwelyck
no. 95; Amsterdam 1976, 41; Mauritshuis 1977, tenstein 1931, 180, no. 893; G 1959 – 1960,
(Middelburg, 1625), cited by Franits 1993, 71.
47; Durantini 1983, 29; Philadelphia, Berlin, 1:86 – 87, 251, repro.; 2:104 – 105, no. 93; Van Hall
and London 1984, 143, 158; Mauritshuis 1985, 2. Franits 1993, 75 – 76; the passage is contained 1963, 116, no. 2; Dobrzycka 1966, 78; Beck
146 – 147 no. 14, 342 no. 744; Broos 1987, 74 – 77; in the introduction to the “Bruyt” section of 1972 – 1973, 1:18; 2: repro. frontispiece; Baum-
Moiso-Diekamp 1987, 481 – 482; Honig in Cats’ Houwelyck (Middelburg, 1625), ch. 3. stark 1980, 220, no. 90; Amsterdam 1981, 7;
Leiden 1988, 81; Franits 1993, 73, 128 – 130; Amsterdam 1993, 61; Sutton 2002, 40
201 n o t e s t o p a g e s 8 7 – 9 6
Notes 6. G 1959 – 1960, 1:86. 23 6. This suggestion was first made in The Hague
* Mentioned in the inventory of Michiel van and Münster 1974, 110. Kunzle 202, 604, asso-
Musscher’s possessions (made following the
7. Gudlaugsson proposed that Van Goyen The Unwelcome Call ciated the scene with the “Choice of Hercules,”
might have owned Ter Borch’s Young Woman
death of his first wife), 30 July 1699, no. 48: 1653, oil on panel, 66.7 × 59.5 (26 @ × 23 *) suggesting that the soldier is faced with a
at Her Toilet with a Maid (cat. 17) or sold it on
“Van Goyen’s pourtrait van Terburgh, ƒ16.—”; Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague (176) choice “between Virtue and Vice, between the
his behalf; see G 1959 – 1960, 1:86 – 87; 2:99.
see A. Bredius, “Inventare von Michiel van difficult and dangerous, and the easy and plea-
Inscription
Musscher,” in Bredius 1915 – 1922, 3 (1917): 990. 8. For other portraits purportedly of Van surable.”
Signed and dated, on a stone: GTB1653
Goyen, see Van Hall 1963, 116.
1. On Van Goyen, see Beck 1972 – 1973; Beck, Provenance
Ergänzungsband (Doornspijk, 1987); and 9. See the note on Van Musscher in the pro- Probably Petronella de la Court, Amsterdam 24
Leiden 1996 – 1997. Specifically on Van Goyen’s enance. Although there is no evidence that he (sale, Amsterdam, 19 October 1707, no. 28).
financial position and the market for his paint- actually studied with Ter Borch, several of Van G. van Slingelandt, The Hague, 1752. Willem V, The Grinder’s Family
ings, see Eric Jan Sluijter, “Jan van Goyen als Musscher’s genre paintings are based on com- Prince of Orange, The Hague; from 1795 – 1815 c. 1653, oil on canvas, 73.5 × 60.8 (28 • × 23 •)
marktleider, virtuoos en vernieuwer,” in Leiden positions by the older artist; see G 1959 – 1960, in Paris Staatliche Museen zu Berlin — Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
1996 – 1997, 39 – 45. 2:290, and Sutton in Dublin and Greenwich Gemäldegalerie (793)
2003 – 2004, 118. Exhibitions
2. G 1959 – 1960, 1:87. Brussels and Antwerp 1946, no. 11; The Hague Inscription
3. On Rembrandt’s two portraits and their and Münster 1974, no. 27; Osaka 2000, no. 20 Signed, lower right: GTB
impact, see E. de Jongh, “The Spur of Wit: 22 Literature Provenance
Rembrandt’s Response to an Italian Chal- Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 134, no. 51; HdG Duc de Choiseul, Paris;* (sale, Duc de Choiseul,
lenge,” Delta 12 (1969), 49 – 67; David Bomford,
Portrait of a Gentleman 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 14 – 15, no. 28; Plietzsch Paris, 6 April 1772, no. 30); (sale, Prince de
Christopher Brown, and Ashok Roy, in Art in c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 28 × 23 (11 × 9 %) 1944, no. 43; Martin 1951, no. 254; G 1959 – 1960, Conti, Paris, 8 April 1777, no. 780); (sale,
the Making: Rembrandt [exh. cat., The Private collection 1:258, repro.; 2:109 – 110, no. 99; Amsterdam Chabot, Paris, 12 December 1785); (sale, Robit,
National Gallery] (London, 1988 – 1989), 80 – 85; Inscription 1993, no. 176; Kettering 2000, 113; Kunzle, 2002, Paris, 11 May 1801, no. 153); Duchesse de Berry,
H. Perry Chapman, Rembrandt’s Self-Portraits: Signed: GTB 604 – 607, repro. Paris; (sale, Duchess de Berry, London, 4 April
A Study in Seventeenth-Century Identity 1837, no. 3); acquired by the Königliche Museen,
Provenance Notes
(Princeton, 1990), 72 – 78; and Pieter van Thiel, Berlin, 1837
(Bernheimer, Paris); H. Bernstein, Paris, Mme 1. See Kettering 2000, 110 – 111.
in Rembrandt: the Master & His Workshop
Gruber, Paris; (Dr. O. Werthheimer, Paris, Exhibitions
(Paintings) [exh. cat., Gemäldegalerie, Rijks- 2. For the varied roles of the trumpeter in
1957); (P. de Boer, Amsterdam, 1957); H. Nord- Paris 1951, no. 118; Oslo 1959, no. 75; The Hague
museum, and The National Gallery] (Berlin, Dutch military society, see Kunzle 2002,
mark, Stockholm, 1957; (P. de Boer, Amster- and Münster 1974, no. 28; Philadelphia, Berlin,
Amsterdam, and London 1991 – 1992), 218 – 221. 608 – 612.
dam, 1976) and London 1984, no. 8
4. On the Ter Borch family collection of draw- 3. This connection was noted by G 1959 – 1960,
Exhibitions Literature
ings and prints, see Kettering 1988, 2:772 – 773. 1:90 – 91.
Atlanta 1985, no. 9 Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 123 – 124, no. 18;
Moses ter Borch drew several copies after
4. For an excellent and provocative discussion Wurzbach 1906 – 1911, 2:700; HdG 1907 – 1927,
Rembrandt prints, including the latter’s Self- Literature
of this issue, see Helgerson 2000. 5 (1913): 12 – 13, no. 19; Brandt 1928, 198 – 199;
Portrait of 1631; see Kettering 1988, 1:330, G 1959 – 1960, 1:86, 250, repro.; 2:104, no. 92; Plietzsch 1944, no. 36; Verbeek 1955, 67;
no. M 84. Sutton 2002, 38 – 39, no. 5 5. It seems probable that Ter Borch painted
G 1959 – 1960, 1:90 – 91, 259, repro.; 2:110 – 111,
such scenes for an Amsterdam market rather
5. There is no mention in the museum’s files of Notes no. 100; Staatliche Museen, Berlin 1978, 433,
than for a local clientele. For example, this
the painting’s having been cut down at any 1. See, for example, the Portrait of Eduard no. 793, repro.; De Vries 1994; Van Dijk 1997
painting, or one like it, seems to have been
time (kind communication from Béatrice Wallis, 1652, by Johannes Verspronck (1606/
in the collection of the De la Court family.
Capaul, Princely Collections, 9 December 1609 – 1662), Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam
In the Petronella de la Court 1707 sale (see
2003). (C. 1414).
provenance), a painting is described as
“Een Trompetter by een Krijgsoverste” (see
G 1959 – 1960, 2:109, no. 99). This painting could
also refer to other scenes with trumpeters (see
cats. 31, 32).
202 n o t e s t o p a g e s 9 7 – 1 0 4
Notes 7. Philadelphia, Berlin, and London 1984, 142. Notes Exhibition
* Basan 1771, no titles. * An examination of the painting in June 2003 The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 31
8. The Hague and Münster, 114 – 115; De Vries
failed to reveal any inscription, despite earlier
1. The younger man is the same model used for 1994, 186 – 187. Literature
references to an “illegible remains of a signa-
the trumpeter in The Unwelcome Call, 1653, cat. Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 125, no. 21; HdG
9. Merling 2002, 120 (G 1959 – 1960, 2:111 – 112, ture” above the trough on the right (see J. Paul
23. If he depicts a client here, then he might 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 141, no. 464; Plietzsch 1944,
no. 100a). The Sarasota painting includes Getty Museum Journal 12 (1984), 311, no. 10). I
well be associated with a blacksmith’s shop, no. 33; G 1959 – 1960, 1:266, repro.; 2:115 – 116,
blacksmith’s equipment visible through the would like to thank Mark Leonard and Anne
perhaps located nearby. no. 109; Moiso-Diekamp 1987, 482, no. D4;
door of the foreground building. For the Woollett for arranging for me to examine this
Sutton 1987
2. De Vries 1994, 188. second work based on Ter Borch’s original painting in the conservation laboratory.
(G 1959 – 1960, 2:112, no. 100b), see Van Dijk Notes
3. For the ubiquitous itinerant grinders in 1. As Gudlaugsson writes, we hear “no other 1. I would like to thank Mark Leonard and
1996, 47. Last seen in Berlin in 1940, the com-
printed “Street Cries,” see Beall 1975. In paint- sound than the spattering of the milk and the Anne Woollett for arranging for me to examine
position substitutes a woman cleaning a scythe
ing, see for example, Michael Sweerts’ Roman heavy breathing of the beasts.” (G 1959 – 1960, this painting in the conservation laboratory.
for Ter Borch’s apprentice and places the latter
Street Scene with an Artist Drawing Bernini’s 1:75, as translated by Sutton 1987, 107).
next to a mule inside the shed. Another woman 2. For both this reason and because of the
Neptune and Triton, c. 1646 – 1648, Museum
engaged in washing appears at the right. 2. For a comparable painting by Cuyp, see genre quality of the image, the painting differs
Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam (in
Woman in a Stable, Dordrechts Museum, in from the tradition of horse portraiture that
Amsterdam, Hartford, and San Francisco 2002,
Washington, London, and Amsterdam 2001,
no. 3). 25 had developed throughout the sixteenth and
122 – 123, no. 15; and for Teniers, see Interior of seventeenth centuries. For a discussion of
4. MacLaren and Brown 1991, 258 – 259, no. 2591; A Maid Milking a Cow in a Barn a Cowshed, c. 1640 – 1650, in C.M. Kauffmann, horse portraits by Paulus Potter (1625 – 1654)
Cornelis Beelt also included grindstones in Catalogue of the Paintings in the Wellington and other Dutch artists, see Sutton 1987,
c. 1653/1654, oil on panel, 47.5 × 50.2 (18 § × 19 #)
some of his renderings of smithies. Museum (London, 1982), 136, no. 175. 100 – 102.
The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles (83.PB.232)
5. Jost Amman’s Ständebuch (1568) shows a Inscription 3. The grain of the panel of The Unwelcome 3. See Plietzsch 1944, no. 33; G 1959 – 1960,
small, portable, treadle-operated grinding None visible* Call (cat. 23), executed about the same time, 2:115 – 116, no. 109.
machine that is run by a craftsman outside his also runs vertically.
own shop (Amman and Sachs 1973, 92). In Provenance 4. This opinion is expressed by Moiso-Diekamp
Christoph Weigel’s Ständebuch (1698), the Samuel van Huls (sale, The Hague, 3 September 1987, 482, no. D4; and by Sutton 1987, 107. As
grinder and his assistant do their work within 1737, lot 87); Willem Lormier (sale, The Hague, 26 noted by Sutton, the two panel supports are
a shop on larger machines driven by a water- 10 November 1756, lot 298); Galitzin collection, quite different. The grain in A Maid Milking
wheel. See Weigel 1977, 247. Saint Petersburg; Dr. P.V. Delaroff, Saint Peters A Horse Stable a Cow in a Barn runs vertically while that in
burg; A.K.K.W. Erasmus, Aerdenhout; Frau c. 1654, oil on panel, 45.3 × 53.5 (17 ¶ × 21 %) A Horse Stable runs horizontally. The verso of
6. De Vries 1994, 187 – 191. De Vries has pro- Bertha Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, Essen; the former painting, moreover, is roughly
The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles (86.PB.631)
posed an identification for the coats of arms on Dr. A. Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, Essen; hewn, while that of A Horse Stable is quite
the side of the house as those of a sixteenth- Inscription
Waldtraut Thomas (née von Bohlen und Hal- smooth.
century regent, Lucas van Camphuysen, Signed, on reverse, with artist’s usual
bach); (sale, Christie’s, London, 11 December
though in the early seventeenth century this ligature: GTB 5. G 1959 – 1960, 2:115 – 116, no. 109.
1981, property of two sisters, withdrawn);
house was bought by Henrick van Emlichheim, (Edward Speelman, Ltd., London) Provenance 6. This suggestion was first made by Gudlaugs-
a blacksmith by trade, and by the early 1650s, (Sale, Amsterdam, 14 August 1771, lot 3, as by son in G 1959 – 1960, 2:115, no. 108. He noted
Exhibitions
the house had been partially demolished. The Metsu), bought by (Nyman); Louis-François that this same model is found in a number of
Essen 1965, no. 14; The Hague and Münster
house was situated on the Korte Kamperstraat de Bourbon, Prince de Conti (sale, Paris, 8 other paintings from the early-to-mid 1650s,
1974, no. 18
between the Ossenmarkt and Kamperstraat. April – 6 June 1777, lot 832), bought by (Lannoy); including The Reading Lesson (cat. 18).
When he was a child, Ter Borch’s family lived Literature M. Poullain (sale, Paris, 15 – 21 March 1780, lot
on the Kamperstraat. De Vries also argues that Martin 1908, 239; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 41), bought by (Langlier); Count G. A. Sparre,
Ter Borch rendered architecturally compre- 140 – 141, no. 463; Plietzsch 1944, no. 32; Sweden; Count G. Wachtmeister, Wånas,
hensible buildings, rebutting various critics G 1959 – 1960, 1:235, repro.; 2:94, no. 74; Getty Sweden; by descent to about 1980; (Edward
who have criticized what they saw as his per- Museum 1984, 311, no. 10; Moiso-Diekamp 1987, Speelman, London, 1981); Fellowship of Friends,
spective difficulties. As for the grindstone, see 482, no. D4; Sutton 1987; Van Heugten 1988, 22, Renaissance, California through (Marco Grassi,
Brandt 1928, 198 – 199, who points out that its repro.; Felius 2002, 29, repro. New York)
axle lies at ground level, the lower half resting
in a water-filled ditch. As the grinder works,
the water splashes up against the protective
board.
203 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 0 5 – 1 1 2
27 3. Plietzsch 1944, 29, was the first to mention a 28 29
coin in the Amsterdam version. He was likely
Gallant Conversation (known as elaborating on earlier interpretations of the A Boy Caring for His Dog Three Soldiers Making Merry
Paternal Admonition) Berlin version, first suggested by Drost in gen- c. 1655, oil on canvas on panel, 35 × 27 (13 # × 10 £) c. 1656, oil on panel, 63.3 × 47.9 (24 • × 18 ¢)
eral terms, that Ter Borch depicted a bordello Alte Pinakothek, Munich (589) Private collection
c. 1654, oil on canvas, 71 × 73 (27 • × 28 #)
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (SK-A-404) masked as a study of bourgeois manners (Drost
Inscription Provenance
1926, 187). The entry for the painting in the
Provenance Signed, lower left: GTB Jan Bisschop [d. 1771], Rotterdam; Adriaen and
Berlin catalogue of 1931 likewise expanded
Willem Lormier, The Hague (1752); (sale, The Jan Hope, Amsterdam; by descent to Henry
upon Drost’s suggestion by actually pointing to Provenance
Hague, 4 July 1763, no. 295); A. L. van Heteren Philip Hope, by descent to Henry Thomas
a coin (Gemäldegalerie, Berlin 1932, repeated Sale, J.F. d’Orvielle, Amsterdam, 15 June 1705,
Gevers, The Hague-Rotterdam; purchased with Hope, Deepdene, by descent to Lord Francis
in Gemäldegalerie, Berlin 1975). Also, no. 42; Gemäldegalerie Düsseldorf (acquired
the collection of Van Heteren Gevers in 1809 Pelham Clinton Hope, London; (P. and D.
Gudlaugsson indicated a coin in his text before 1742); Gemäldegalerie Mannheim;
Colnaghi and A. Wertheimer, 1898)
Exhibitions (G 1959 – 1960, 1:97), though qualified it in his Hofgalerie Munich (since 1799)
Rome 1928, no. 119; Brussels and Antwerp 1946, catalogue entry (G 1959 – 1960, 2:117, no. 110II Exhibitions
Exhibitions
no. 8; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 32; [Berlin version]), stating that a fastidious later The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 37
The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 35a; Wash-
Oberlin 2000; Copenhagen and Amsterdam collector rubbed out the coin (repeated by ington and Cincinnati 1988 – 1989, no. 42; Literature
2001, no. 68 Rosenberg, Slive, and Ter Kuile 1966, 128, refer- Amsterdam 2000, no. 120 Smith 1829 – 1942, 4 (1833): 133, no. 49; HdG
ring to the Berlin version). However, the most 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 18, no. 36; Plietzsch 1944,
Literature Literature
recent book published by the Gemäldegalerie, no. 66; G 1959 – 1960, 1:282, repro.; 2: 136 – 137,
Hoet 1752, 2:442; Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 135, no. 56; HdG
Berlin (Bock 1998, 272) has refuted the pres- no. 123
117 – 118, no. 4; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 69, 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 57 – 58, no. 158; Hannema
ence of a coin, while still interpreting the scene
no. 186; Plietzsch 1944, 28 – 29; G 1959 – 1960, 1943, 56; Plietzsch, 1944, no. 35; G 1959 – 1960, Notes
as a high-class bordello. As for the Amsterdam
1:96 – 97, 267, repro.; 2:116 – 117, no. 110-I; 1:275, repro.; 2:130 – 131, no. 116; Alte Pina- 1. Israel 1995, 724 – 736. The political turmoil in
version, the conservation studio of the Rijks-
Staatliche Museen, Berlin 1978, 430, no. 791, kothek 1983, no. 589; Schama 1987, 395 – 396 Overijssel was related to broader conflicts in
museum has found no trace of a coin, nor is the
repro.; Hoekstra 1991, 37 – 41; Kettering 1993/ the Netherlands between advocates of the
area around the hand abraded. Notes
1997, 95 – 124; Alpers 1997, 63 – 64; Adams 1999, house of Orange and those, under the leader-
1. This entry is based on one in Washington
230 – 233, 237; Helgerson 2000; Filedt Kok 2001, 4. Stone Ferrier 1985, chapter 5. See also J.P. ship of the province of Holland, who wanted to
and Cincinnati 1988 – 1989, 166 – 168, no. 42.
no. 72 Guépin, “De rug zonder ommezijde,” in The reduce the impact of the Orangists. The issue
Hague and Münster 1974, and Wallert’s essay 2. The suggestion, made in The Hague and in Overijssel began with a debate about the
Notes
in this volume. For the earliest published refer- Münster 1974, 134, that Ter Borch was inspired appointment of a sheriff (drost) of Orangist
1. This is a loose translation of Instruction
ence to the satin in the Amsterdam version, by Lucas van Leyden’s engraving Woman with persuasion to Twenthe in 1653. The noble in
Paternelle printed on the engraving, which by
see Hoet 1752, 2: 442 : “Een staande vrouw in a Dog seems unlikely. question, Rutger van Haersolte, had the back-
the turn of the nineteenth century had begun
’t wit satyn.” The many seventeenth-century ing of Zwolle to take over this lucrative and
to connote admonition rather than lesson, to 3. Kultzen 1996, 94 – 95, no. 24, indicates that
producers of variations, pastiches, and para- powerful position, but not of Deventer, which
judge by Goethe’s reference to the engraved Sweerts’ painting was probably in the collec-
phrases of both versions also emphasized the was aligned with the Holland States party. In
image as the “sogenannte vaeterliche Ermahn- tion of Anthony Deutz. Thus, it would have
satin above all else. Taking advantage of the 1654, when the “States of Overijssel” gathered
ung.” Wolfgang von Goethe, Die Wahlver been in Amsterdam by 1650, when Deutz
ambiguous back-turned posture, which in Zwolle, Van Haersolte proposed that Willem
wandtschaften (Leipzig, [c. 1910]), 115. returned from Italy.
allowed a display of the brilliant fabric, these III be appointed stadholder of Overijssel and
2. See, for example, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin artists showed the girl alone or engrossed in a 4. Schama 1987, 395. that Willem Frederik, stadholder of Friesland,
1932, 470; G 1959 – 1960, 1:96 – 97; Rosenberg, letter or attended by a servant or involved in Groningen, and Drenthe, be named lieutenant-
5. According to G 1959 – 1960, 2:130, this identi-
Slive, and Ter Kuile 1966, 128; and Gemälde making music, but always maintaining a lady- stadholder, but this proposal was denounced
fication was first made by A.J. Moes-Veth;
galerie, Berlin 1975, 430. like, upright, elegant, cool bearing. See, for when the “States of Overijssel” subsequently
however, no mention of the Munich painting
example, A Singing Practice, National Gallery
appears in her article, Moes-Veth 1955.
of Scotland, Edinburgh, in Edinburgh 1992,
no. 4.
5. Kettering 1993/1997, (1993): 113 – 114; (1997):

101 – 103. See also Philadelphia, Berlin, and
London 1984, no. 9.
6. Kettering 1988, 2:431 (Gs 61, folio 19, recto),

and Kettering 1993/1997, (1993): 113 – 114; (1997):
101 – 103.
204 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 1 4 – 1 2 0
met in Deventer. The conflict grew so intense, 30 3. For information about Netscher’s signed 31
and the threat of force so imminent, that a copy on panel, see G 1959 – 1960, 2:148, no. 139a,
delegation from Deventer requested more The Suitor’s Visit and Wieseman 2002, 314 – 315, no. B2. The Officer Dictating a Letter While a
troops be sent from the States General in 1655, c. 1658, oil on canvas, 80 × 75 (31 ! × 29 ∞) composition was also known by Gabriel Metsu. Trumpeter Waits
a request that was granted. Conflicts, in fact, National Gallery of Art, Washington, Andrew W. Mellon See Korthals Altes 2000 – 2001, 266, fig. 16
c. 1658/1659, oil on canvas, 74.5 × 51 (29 & × 20 %)
did arise, and in 1657 a garrison sent from Collection (1937.1.58) (HdG 189). The National Gallery, London (NG 5847)
Deventer to Hasselt came under bombardment Provenance 4. Kettering 1993/1997, 122 note 66, on the other Inscription
from troops sent on behalf of Zwolle by Van Charles Auguste Louis Joseph, Duc de Morny hand, suggests that the model was Gesina’s Signed, on left end of table stretcher
Haersolte. The leaders of the Holland States [d. 1865], Paris (sale, Paris, 31 May 1865, no. 82); younger sister Aeltjen (Aleida), who would (worn): GTB
finally intervened in this dispute in 1657, and Josè Salamanca y Mayol [Marquès de Sala- have been twenty-one years old in 1657. Gesina,
the various factions reconciled in that year. mance, d. 1866], Madrid; (sale, Paris, 3 – 6 June Provenance*
who was born in 1631, would have been twenty-
The external threat, posed by the machinations 1867, no. 126); Baron Adolfe de Rothschild Lothar Franz, Graf von Schönborn, Pommers-
six years old.
of Von Galen, continued through much of this [1823 – 1900], Paris; by inheritance to Baron felden [by 1719]; by descent in this family (sale,
period. Holland, however, was not successful Maurice de Rothschild [d. 1957], Paris; (Duveen 5. See Kettering 1988, 2:416 – 614. Gesina began Paris, 17 May 1867, no. 117); Khalil Bey (sale,
in reigning in the prince-bishop. Von Galen Brothers, New York, in 1922); sold July 1922 to this poetry album in 1652 and contributed to it Paris, 16 – 18 January 1868, no. 103); (sale, Baron
achieved his goal of developing an absolutist Andrew W. Mellon, Pittsburgh and Washing- intermittently until the 1660s. de Beurnonville, Paris, 9 May 1881, no. 518;
Catholic state along the Dutch-German border ton, D.C.; deeded 28 December 1934 to The Amédée Gautray (sale, Paris, 23 February 1883,
6. See Kettering 1993/1997 for discussion of the
when he successfully besieged Münster in 1661, A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, no. 57; (sale, E. Sécretan, Paris, 1 July 1889,
adaptation of Petrarchan concepts of love in
a victory that would have profound conse- Pittsburgh no. 172); (Colnaghi, London); Arthur James,
Dutch literary traditions and in Ter Borch’s
quences for Deventer, and Ter Borch, in 1672. London, by 1890; bequeathed by his widow,
Exhibitions paintings.
Mrs. Mary Venetia James, 1948
2. Israel 1995, 709 – 710, describes the political New York 1939, no. 369 7. The contents of this emblem book were
conflicts concerning the army that arose dur- Exhibitions
Literature reprinted in Krul’s De Pampiere Wereld
ing the Great Assembly, held in The Hague in London 1890, no. 75; London 1976, no. 12
Plietzsch 1944, 21, 47, no. 57; G 1948 – 1949, (Amsterdam, 1644), 295. G 1956 – 1960, 1:116 –
1651. The desire of the province of Holland to
2:235 – 267; G 1959 – 1960, 1:116 – 119, 296, repro.; 117; 2:148, was the first to draw attention to the Literature
reduce the influence of the house of Orange
2:147 – 148, no. 139; Haverkamp-Begemann, relationship between Ter Borch’s composition Meusel 1787 – 1791, 2 (1788): 76; Pommersfelden
within the army is reflected in decisions that
1965, 38 – 41, 62 – 63, repro.; Robinson 1974, and the print from Krul’s emblem, which he 1857, no. 427; Parthey 1863 – 1864, 2: 624;
were made to weaken its political and social
53 – 54; Smith 1987, 423 – 424; Roodenburg 1991, cited in its republished form in De Pampiere HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 15, nos. 29 and 30;
role within the republic.
152 – 189, repro.; Ydema 1991, 188, no. 860; Ket- Wereld. G 1959 – 1960, 1:110, 114 – 117, 298, repro.; 2:
3. Kunzle 2002, 591. tering 1993/1997, 97, 107, 122 note 66; Wheelock 150 – 152, no. 141; MacLaren 1960, 44 – 46; Sut-
8. Krul 1634, 16 (author’s translation).
1995, 26 – 29; Denver and Newark 2001, 147 ton 1990, 26, 28; MacLaren and Brown 1991,
4. For comparable poses in Teniers’ paintings
9. Kettering 1988, 2:440, folio 39, verso: “Wit 1:41 – 43; Frankfurt 1993 – 1994, 150, repro.;
to that of the seated drinker, see Antwerp 1991, Notes
Suijverheijt” and “Incornaet Vraecke or Sutton 1997, 3; Kettering 1999b, 520 – 521,
5 – 56, no. 13, repro., and 110 – 111, no. 32, repro. 1. This entry is largely based on Wheelock 1995,
Vreedtheijt.” repro.; Kettering 2000, 113 – 115; Kunzle 2002,
26 – 28.
5. See G 1959 – 1960, 2:137, no. 123. 616
10. In executing the satin, Ter Borch freely
2. G 1959 – 1960, 2:148, has carefully indicated Notes
6. See G 1959 – 1960, 1:297, repro. applied thin fluid paint layers that he blended
other instances in which these objects appear * As outlined by Gudlaugsson (G 1959 – 1960,
wet into wet in a series of thin scumbles of
7. See Wieseman 2002, 170 – 171, no. 6. in Ter Borch’s works. The table carpet, for 2:150), and more fully in MacLaren and Brown
liquid, soft-edged colors. He then painted a
example, is also seen in The Letter Writer 1991, 42, Hofstede de Groot confused the early
very thin glaze over the underlying layers to
(Mauritshuis, The Hague, 797), the chair in provenance of the present picture (HdG
further blend and soften their forms. He cre-
The Visit (Bührle Foundation, Zurich, [G 1959 – 1907 – 1927, 5 [1913]: 15, no. 30) with that of a
ated his flesh tones with a gray underpainting,
1960, 2:163 – 164, no. 149]), the mantelpiece in copy after the Officer Writing a Letter in the
thinly glazed in the shaded areas, and more
A Young Woman at Her Toilet (Wallace Collec- Philadelphia Museum of Art (cat. 32; HdG
thickly painted in the light areas. I would like
tion, London, P235), and A Lute Player with a 1907 – 1927, 5 [1913]: 15, no. 29).
to thank Carol Christensen for discussing Ter
Boy (Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten,
Borch’s technique with me.
Antwerp, 349).
11. The Hague and Münster 1974, 136, no. 36a.
205 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 2 0 – 1 2 4
1. Kettering 2000, 110. In addition to the pres- 32 Notes Exhibitions
ent painting and cat. 32, Ter Borch’s paintings 1. For a listing of related works, see cat. 31 New York 1942, no. 62; New York 1945, no. 8 (as
on this theme include Officer Writing a Letter, Officer Writing a Letter note 1. Metsu); Pittsburgh 1954, no. 39; The Hague and
c. 1657 – 1658 (National Museum, Warsaw) and c. 1658/1659, oil on canvas, 56.8 × 43.8 (21 £ × 18 •) Münster 1974, no. 42; Dublin and Greenwich
2. Sutton 1997, 9 – 10; the relationship between
Officer Reading a Letter, c. 1657 – 1658 (Gemäl- Philadelphia Museum of Art, The William L. Elkins 2003 – 2004, no. 9
the works had previously gone unrealized
degalerie, Dresden, 1833). A variant of the Collection, 1924 (E1924 – 3-21)
because the dimensions of the latter picture Literature
present picture, probably a studio work, omits Inscription had been inaccurately recorded. Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 104 – 105, no. 100
the figure of the man seated at the back of the Signed, on table stretcher, lower right: (as Metsu); HdG 1907 – 1927, 1 (1907): 281 – 282,
table (Gemäldegalerie, Dresden, 1829). GTBorch 3. Kettering essay, page 28.
no. 101 (as Metsu); G 1959 – 1960, 1:116, 174, 301,
2. Whether the young helmeted soldier is act- Provenance 4. G 1959 – 1960, 1:116. repro.; 2:156, no. 144; Blankert 1995, 39, repro.;
ing as amanuensis or is receiving advice and (Possibly sale, Petronella de la Court [widow Delft 1996, 149, repro.; Sutton 1997; Sutton
5. Ter Borch similarly paired a hound with a
counsel from an older, more sophisticated of Adam Oortmans], Amsterdam, 19 October in Dublin and Greenwich 2003, 19; Vergara
masculine subject and a spaniel with a femi-
officer on the proper wording of his own letter 1707, no. 31). Jan and Pieter Bisschop, Amster- 2003, 58
nine one in a Portrait of a Man and Portrait of
is not absolutely clear, although the former dam, by 1752 [collection sold en bloc to Adri- Notes
a Woman of about 1663 (oil on canvas, 80 × 61.5
seems the more likely scenario. See Kettering aen and John Hope, Amsterdam]; Henry Philip * The Birnbaums (Birnbaum-Ten Cate)
cm; sale, London [Christie’s], 15 June 2002, lot
2000, 113. Hope, 1833; Henry Thomas Hope, 1854; Lord changed their surname to Bingham in 1946
611); G 1959 – 1960, 2: nos. 185 and 186.
3. On this and other pentimenti in the picture Francis Pelham Clinton Hope, London; [collec- (letter to the Frick Art Reference Library, 28
tion sold en bloc to] (P. and D. Colnaghi and 6. These same elements also appear in the February 1946).
see MacLaren and Brown 1991, 1:41 – 42.
A. Wertheimer, London, 1898); W. L. Elkins, London picture (cat. 31), with similar connota-
4. A brief survey of the role of the trumpeter in tions. 1. G 1959 – 1960, 1:116.
Philadelphia; acquired by the museum in 1924
the Netherlands in the seventeenth century is 2. See Sutton 1997, 3, for a complete enumera-
Exhibitions 7. Sutton in Dublin and Greenwich 2003 – 2004,
provided in Kunzle 2002, 611 – 612; also Ketter- tion, as well as cats. 27, 32.
The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 41; Philadel- 131 – 133, nos. 18, 19.
ing 2000, 113.
phia, Berlin, and London 1984, no. 10; Frank- 3. Sutton 1997, 8. For a thorough discussion of
5. For a thorough discussion of love letters in furt 1993 – 1994, no. 11; Dublin and Greenwich 33 letter writing manuals and the theme of love
seventeenth-century Dutch painting, see Dub- 2003 – 2004, no. 8 letters in seventeenth-century Dutch painting,
lin and Greenwich 2003.
Literature
Woman Sealing a Letter see Dublin and Greenwich 2003 – 2004.
6. Peter Thornton, Seventeenth-Century Inte Hoet 1752, 2: no. 528; Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): c. 1659, oil on canvas, 56.5 × 43.8 (22 @ × 17 @)
4. See G 1959 – 1960, 2:156, for a list of other
rior Decoration in England, France, and Hol 121, no. 11; Waagen 1854, 2:115 – 116, no. 2; Hope Private collection, New York
paintings possibly influenced by Ter Borch’s
land (New Haven and London, 1978), 159. Ter 1891, no. 70; Hope 1898, no. 70, repro.; Elkins Provenance Woman Sealing a Letter.
Borch included the tentlike canopy or pavilion 1900, 2: no. 129; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 16, Richard Wingsfield, 3d Viscount of Powers
bed most frequently (although not exclusively) no. 31; Plietzsch 1944, 41 (under no. 22); 5. For various readings of this object and its
court (1730 – 1788), Co. Wicklow, Ireland;
in scenes of letter writers and readers (see, for G 1959 – 1960, 1:114 – 117, 300, repro.; 2:154 – 155, implications, see Blankert 1995, 39; Wheelock
Duchess of Leinster; Hon. Mrs. Aubrey
example, cat. 32, as well as cat. 34). Few other no. 143; MacLaren 1960, 45, 46 note 17; Marks in Washington and The Hague 1995 – 1996,
Topham Beauclerk, Bestwood Lodge, Notting-
artists appear to have included such beds in 1968, 130; Rishel 1974, 30 – 33; Robinson 1974, 186 – 188; Vergara 1998, 240; and Sutton in
hamshire; Hon. Aubrey William de Vere Beau-
genre scenes, but compare the very similar 40; Sutton 1986, 229; Sutton 1990, 26 – 30; Dublin and Greenwich 2003 – 2004, 186 – 189,
clerk; Mrs. de Vere Beauclerk Syllas; Mr. de
canopy suspended from a tree limb to shelter MacLaren and Brown 1991, 1:42; Kettering no. 39.
Vere R. Syllas, London; Mr. de Vere D. Birn-
the deceased wife of Godard van Reede van 1993/1997, 110 – 115, repro.; Sutton 1997, 6, 7, baum, London (from 1937), and later New York 6. Sutton 1997, 9 – 10. See discussion under
Nederhorst in Herman and Cornelis Saftleven, 9 – 10; Vergara 1998, 240 note 14; Kunzle 2002, City and Scarsdale, New York; Mr. and Mrs. cat. 32.
Portrait of the Family of Godard van Reede van 616 David Bingham;* (art market, London, 1957);
Nederhorst, 1634 (Stichting Slot Zuylen, Oud- 7. See Literature section.
private collection, Europe; (Otto Naumann
Zuilen). Ltd., New York)
7. Kettering 2000, 114.
206 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 2 6 – 1 3 4
34 Notes 35 female curiosity”). The one engraving men-
1. For a discussion of the type of carpet tioned by Gudlaugsson (Demidoff sale, 1868)
A Lady at Her Toilet depicted here, see Ydema 1991, 99 – 107, 188, Curiosity postdates Smith.
c. 1660, oil on canvas, 76.2 × 59.7 (30 × 23 !) 196 – 197. For a brief discussion of the style of c. 1660, oil on canvas, 76.2 × 62.2 (30 × 24 !)
2. Kettering 1993/1997.
The Detroit Institute of Arts, Founders Society Purchase, silver toilet items, see Denver and Newark Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,
Eleanor Clay Ford Fund, General Membership Fund, 2001 – 2002, 197, no. 86. The Jules Bache Collection, 1949 (49.7.38) 3. Fock 2001b, 95 – 96; see also Fock 2001a, 109,
Endowment Income Fund and Special Activities Fund where she comments that gold chandeliers
2. For an excellent discussion of art and litera- Provenance
(65.10) hung nearly exclusively in churches and gov-
ture that approached narrative in this manner, Gaillard de Gagny, 1762, Paris; (sale, Paris, 29
Inscription March 1762, no. 15); Randon de Boisset, Paris; ernment spaces, silver chandeliers in houses.
see Fehl 1997.
Signed, on the fireplace: GTB (sale, Paris, 27 February – 25 March 1777, no. The fireplace is modeled on the work of the
3. Although it is possible that Ter Borch 52); (Lebrun, Paris, 1777); Robit, Paris, 1801; Deventer woodcarver Derck Daniels, as is the
Provenance
depicted the candles as being snuffed out (sale, Paris, 11 May 1801, no. 151); (Bonnemai- frame of the mantelpiece picture. See Dubbe
Probably sale, Amsterdam, 22 April 1771, no. 21
because he wanted to emphasize that the scene son, Paris, 1801). Duchesse de Berry, Paris, by 1982b, 362, repro.
(as Eglon van der Neer, on panel, 81 × 63.3 cm);
occurred during daylight hours, this interpre- 1833; (sale, Paris, 4 – 6 April 1837, no. 2); Anatoli
probably P. Locquet, Amsterdam (sale, 4. The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 44.
tation seems unlikely. It seems improbable that Nikolaevich Demidov, Prince of San Donato;
Amsterdam, 22 November 1783, no. 255 [as
Ter Borch would have chosen to depict them in (sale, Paris, 18 April 1868, no. 19); Baron Achille 5. Adams 1993 – 1994; Vergara 1998; Dublin and
Eglon van der Neer, on canvas, 82.3 × 64.3 cm]);
this central location had he not wished to draw Seillière, Paris, from 1868. Princesse de Sagan, Greenwich, Conn., 2003 – 2004.
Musée de Louvre, Paris, 1797; Château Saint-
specific attention to their symbolic implications. Paris, by 1883. Baronesse Mathilde von Roth-
Cloud, 1802; Willems Collection, Frankfurt-
am-Main, 1833; Lionel de Rothschild, London, 4. For a list of the various symbolic interpreta- schild [d. 1924], Frankfurt, by 1912; Baron
Goldschmidt von Rothschild, Frankfurt, by
36
1836, by descent to The Hon. Mrs. Clive Beh- tions associated with a mirror, see Sutton in
rens, London; by descent to Major P.E.C. Philadelphia, Berlin, and London 1984, 151. inheritance, 1924 – 1927; (Duveen Bros., London The Introduction (An Officer Making
Harris, London (Rothschild and Stiebel, New None of these, however, seem to be relevant to and New York, 1927); Jules S. Bache, New York,
1927 – 1944; The Jules Bache Foundation, New
His Bow to a Lady)
York, 1965) the mirror’s context in this work, in large part
because the woman is not looking into it. York, 1944 – 1949; The Jules Bache Collection, c. 1662, oil on canvas, 76 × 68 (29 • × 26 #)
Exhibitions Polesden Lacey, The McEwan Collection,
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1949
London 1844, no. 103; London 1878, no. 157; 5. Kettering 1988, 2:440, folio 39, verso: “Wit The National Trust (POL. P. 50)
London 1885, no. 121; London 1929, no. 223; Suijverheijt” and “Blaeu Jalousije.” Exhibitions
Paris 1883, no. 126; London 1929, no. 96; New Provenance
Birmingham 1950, no. 63; London 1952 – 1953,
6. Kettering 1993/1997, 108, however, discusses York 1939, no. 367; New York, 1942, no. 63; New Johan van der Marck, Leiden, and heirs; (sale,
no. 395; San Francisco, Toledo, and Boston
Gerard de Lairesse’s commentary on genre York 1943, no. 38; Boston 1970; New York 1970, Amsterdam, 25 August 1773, no. 326); Jan Jacob
1966 – 1967, no. 85; Kansas City 1967 – 1968, no.
scenes (gezelschapjes) in De Lairesse 1707, no. 281; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 44; de Bruijn; (sale, Amsterdam, 12 September
23; The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 45; Phila-
182 – 184, in which he describes scenes of ladies Philadelphia, Berlin, and London 1984, no. 12; 1798, no. 8); James Crawford, Rotterdam
delphia, Berlin, and London 1984, no. 13; Grand
sipping tea and gentlemen drinking wine as Athens 1992, no. 16 [d.1816]; (sale, Christie’s, London, 26 April
Rapids 1999, no. 3; Denver and Newark
“little dramas, involving the passions of 1806, no. 11); George Granville, 2d Marquess of
2001 – 2002, no. 86 Literature
‘entreating and refusing.’” Stafford [1758 – 1833]; 1st Duke of Sutherland,
Literature Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 118, no. 6; 9 (1842):
installed in the Cabinet of Cleveland House,
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 174, no. 13 (as Eglon 7. G 1959 – 1960, 2:169, no. 165, notes that Ter 529 – 530, no. 3; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 62,
St. James’s, London, after 1833; 2d Duke of
van der Neer) and 136 – 137, no. 61 (as Gerard ter Borch’s painting influenced works by Eglon no. 169; Plietzsch 1944, 21, 47, no. 56;
Sutherland, Stafford House [formerly Cleve-
Borch); Waagen 1854, 2:129; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 van der Neer, who was an Amsterdam artist. G 1959 – 1960, 1:124, 314, repro.; 2:168 – 169,
land House], London, 1854; Yolande Duvernay,
(1913): 22, no. 47; Plietzsch 1944, 21, no. 82, See, for example, Van der Neer’s A House of no. 164; Haverkamp-Begemann 1965, 40,
Mrs. Lyne Stephens, Lynford Hall, Norfolk,
repro.; G 1959 – 1960, 1:315, repro.; 2:169, no. 165; Pleasure, 1675, Mauritshuis, The Hague (862). repro.; Naumann 1981, 1:57 – 58 note 42, 111
and Roehampton Grove; (sale, Christie’s,
Haverkamp-Begemann 1965, 38 – 41; Detroit In fact, Ter Borch’s painting may once have note 143; Sutton 1986, 187; Kettering 1988, 1:148
London, 11 May 1895, no. 347 [property of
Institute of Arts 1966, 145, repro.; Detroit Insti- been attributed to Van der Neer (see prov- (under no. gjr88); Ingamells 1992, 201; Ketter-
Mrs. Lyne Stephens]); bought by Adrian Lesser;
tute of Arts 1979, 70, no. 47; Sutton 1986, 88; enance). I would like to thank Eddy Schave- ing 1993/1997, 95, 108, 110, 113, 122 note 69,
William McEwan MP, 1896-; by inheritance to
Moiso-Diekamp 1987, 483 – 484, D 7; Kettering maker for drawing my attention to the entries repro.
his daughter, Margaret, Mrs. the Honourable
1993/1997, 97 in the 1771 and 1783 Amsterdam sales.
Notes Ronald Greville, Polesden Lacey [d. 1942];
8. G 1959 – 1960, 2:169, no. 165, even proposed 1. My thanks to Walter Liedtke for allowing me bequeathed to the National Trust, Polesden
that Curiosity, which has similar dimensions, to read his entry on this work for the forth- Lacey, 1942
was a pendant to Lady at Her Toilet. coming catalogue of Dutch paintings in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, and to Lisa
Vergara for discussing the painting. About the
title, Smith probably invented it (Smith
1829 – 1842, 4 [1833]: 118, no. 6, “The Letter, or
207 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 3 5 – 1 4 0
Exhibitions Literature 38 39
London 1913 – 1914, no. 62; London 1929, no. (Possibly) Thirlestane House 1846, 73, no. 434;
228; London 1945, no. 37; Birmingham 1950, (possibly) Northwick 1858, 14, no. 59; HdG Portrait of a Young Woman Glass of Lemonade
no. 61; London 1952 – 1953, no. 398; New York, 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 98, no. 307; 110, no. 345; c. 1663, oil on canvas, 63.3 × 52.7 (24 • × 20 #) c. 1663/1664, oil on canvas, 67.2 × 54 (26 * × 21 @)
Toledo, and Toronto 1954, no. 12; Aberystwyth, Plietzsch 1944, 53, no. 86 (as on panel); G 1959 – The Cleveland Museum of Art, The Elisabeth Severance The State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg (881)
Cardiff, and Swansea 1958, no. 38; The Hague 1960, 1:140, 336, repro.; 2:189 – 190, no. 193; Prentiss Collection (1944.93)
Provenance
and Münster 1974, no. 49; London 1976, no. 13; MacLaren 1960, 41 – 42; MacLaren and Brown Provenance N.G. Hasselaer (sale, Amsterdam, 26 April
Washington 1985 – 1986, no. 293; Birmingham 1991, 1:41 – 43; Kettering 1997, 41, 43, 46, repro.; (Sale, Jean Jacques de Faesch, Amsterdam, 1742, no. 11, with larger dimensions); (bought
1989, no. 40; London 1995, no. 64 Kettering 1999a, 46, 60, repro. 3 July 1833, no. 56 [to Chapelin or Caplin]). by Jacques de Roore for Willem Lormier);
Literature Notes F. Austen, London, 1877; (M. Knoedler, New Lormier, The Hague (as a pendant to a painting
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 130 – 131, no. 41; * As suggested by MacLaren and Brown 1991, York, 1923); Mrs. Elisabeth Severance Prentiss, by Metsu); sold to Marc-Réné Voyer, Marquis
HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 72, no. 196 (prov- 1:40 note 3, this picture is presumably the Cleveland; bequeathed by her to the museum, d’Argenson, on 27 June 1748 (as a pendant by
enance confused with that of cat. 30); G 1959 – painting mentioned in Thirlestane House 1846, 1944 Metsu); L.J. Gaignat, Paris, by 1754 (sale, Paris,
1960, 1:132 – 133, repro.; 2:183 – 184, no. 187; 73, no. 434, and Northwick 1858, 14, no. 59. Exhibitions 14 – 22 February 1769, no. 21 [as a pendant to a
Polesden Lacey 1964, no. 50; Stone-Ferrier 1985, London 1877, no. 277; Cleveland 1936, no. 245; painting by Metsu (HdG 189)]); Duc de Choi-
1. De Winkel 1998, 333.
178; Kettering 1993/1997, 95 – 107; Laing 1996, Grand Rapids 1949; Minneapolis 1952; New seul, Paris (sale, Paris, 6 April 1774, no. 25 [as a
8 – 10; Kunzle 2002, 613 2. For a thorough discussion of the history of York, Toledo, and Toronto 1954 – 1955, no. 11; pendant to a painting by Metsu (HdG 189)]);
black costume and its connotations in the Akron 1956; New York 1962, no. 21; Cleveland (Choseul-Praslin sale, Paris, 18 February 1793,
Notes
seventeenth century, see Groeneweg 1995. 1973b, no. 21; Sarasota 1981 – 1982, no. 10 no. 104); (Choiseul-Praslin sale, Paris, 19 – 20
1. G 1959 – 1960, 1:132; 2:183 – 184, no. 187.
May 1808, no. 18); (De Séréville sale, Paris, 22
2. Kolfin 1999, 166, on Codde’s The Dance Les 3. See Kettering 1997, 43. Literature January 1812, no. 23); Empress Josephine at
son of 1627, aptly titled because of the staging HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 78, no. 220 (as possibly Malmaison, acquired by the Hermitage in 1814
4. Gudlaugsson, in fact, termed the figure in
of the couple: the scene suggests not so much a the Princesse de Condé?); possibly identical
this portrait “foppish” and a “mayfly,” dismis- Exhibitions
party in progress as a dance lesson. See also with HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 128, no. 416f;
sively remarking on the man’s devotion to The Hague and Münster 1974, 174, no. 52; Rot-
Nevitt 2003, 44 – 46. Hannema 1943, 101; Francis 1944, 88 – 89;
passing fads; see G 1959 – 1960, 1:140. In a more terdam 1985, 26, no. 3; New York and Chicago
G 1959 – 1960, 1:140, 337, repro.; 2:190, no. 194;
3. Kettering 1993/1997, 101/109. positive context, Kettering discusses the 1988, 9, no. 4
Wolfgang Stechow in Cleveland Art Museum
“effeminate” qualities of the portrait in Ketter-
4. Kettering 2000, 108 – 110. 1982, 222 – 223; MacLaren and Brown 1991, 1:39; Literature
ing 1997, 46.
Chong 1993, 18; Kettering 1999a, 46, 60, repro. Hoet 1752, 2:50, no. 11; Smith 1829 – 1842, 4
5. De Lairesse 1707, 2:6; English translation (1833): 119 – 120, no. 8; 9 (1842): 530, no. 5;
37 from De Lairesse/Fritsch 1738, 345. For an
Notes
Waagen 1864, 92; Hermitage 1863 – 1916, no.
1. De Winkel 1998, 330.
overview of “timelessness” in dress, see De 870; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 35 – 36, no. 87;
Portrait of a Young Man
Marly 1980, and more recently, Gordenker 2. G 1959 – 1960, 1:140. Hannema 1943, 179; Plietzsch 1944, no. 60;
c. 1663, oil on canvas, 67.3 × 54.3 (26 ! × 21 ™) 2001, 22 – 24.
3. G 1959 – 1960, 2:197, no. 213. For more on G 1948 – 1949, 257, repro.; Bazin 1958, 171;
The National Gallery, London (NG 1399)
6. Martin Lister, A Journey to Paris in the Year this picture, see Laura Coyle, in Antiquities to G 1959 – 1960, 1:335; 2:187 – 189, no. 192; Levin-
Provenance son-Lessing 1964, no. 54; Kuznetsov and Linnik
1698 (London, 1699), 39 – 40, cited in Gordenker Impressionism: The William A. Clark Collec
John Rushout, Baron Northwick [1770 – 1859], 1982, repro.
2001, 23 note 199. On the preference of Johan tion, Corcoran Gallery of Art (Washington and
probably by 1846* (sale, Thirlestane House,
de Witt (the infamously abstemious stadholder London, 2001), 64 – 65.
Cheltenham, 26 July-24 August 1859, no. 1114);
of the United Provinces) for absolute truth to
Sir Charles Eastlake; bought from the estate of 4. Canvas, 71 × 58.5 cm, private collection,
nature in portraits, see P. Leupe, “De Schilder
his widow, Lady Eastlake, in 1894 Great Britain (G 1959 – 1960, 2: no. 196). Other
Jan Lievensz. en de portretten van de Bickers,
similarly conceived portraits include the Por
Exhibitions 1663 – 64,” De Nederlandsche Spectator (1874),
trait of a Woman (canvas, 61 × 51 cm, Musée
London 1983a, no. 1 122 – 123.
de l’hôtel Sandelin, Saint-Omer) (G 1959 – 1960,
2:198, no. 215).
5. The artistic tastes and self-imaging require-

ments of Deventer’s elite are discussed in Ket-
tering 1999a.
6. G 1959 – 1960, 2:190.
208 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 4 1 – 1 4 8
Notes 40 c. 1900 – 1923; The Art Museum of the 3. For a discussion of the provenances of these
1. See, for example, the commentaries in The Ateneum, Linder Collection, Helsinki, 1924; two paintings, see Marja Supinen in Helsinki
Hague and Münster 1974, 174, no. 52; Rotter- Glass of Lemonade The Museum of Foreign Art, Helsinki, 1990 1995.
dam 1985, 26, no. 3; New York and Chicago Attributed to Gerard ter Borch Exhibitions 4. G 1959 – 1960, 2:158 – 159, no. 146; 186 – 187,
1988, 9, no. 4. c. 1664, oil on canvas, 67 × 54 (26 ™ × 21 @)
The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 51; Frankfurt no. 190, dated the two paintings some six to
Collection Pieter C.W.M. Dreesmann, London
2. See Hochstrasser 1995, 54 – 56. 1993 – 1994, no. 9; Helsinki 1995; Dublin and seven years apart, largely on the basis of the
Provenance Greenwich 2003 – 2004, 105 – 106 differences in the costumes. Moiso-Diekamp
3. Henry van Oosten, The Dutch Gardener: Or, John Maitland; (sale, Christie’s, London, 30
Literature 1987, 479 – 480, no. D1, did not believe that the
the Compleat Florist (London, 1711), 249. July 1831, no. 99). John Rogers; (sale, Christie’s,
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 121, no. 12; HdG two works were pendants. Supinen in Helsinki
4. See Dixon 1995, 159. Because of their high London, 30 April 1847, no. 182). (Samuel Wood- 1995, 14, preferred not to make a judgment on
1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 66, no. 178; G 1959 – 1960,
acidity, lemons were believed to mediate the burn, London); (sale, Christie’s, London, 24 the matter.
1:333, repro.; 2:186 – 187, no. 190; Philadelphia,
excess heat caused by humoral fires. June 1853, no. 51); Marquis du Lau; (sale, Chris-
Berlin, and London 1984, 148, repro.; Moiso-
tie’s, London, 3 June 1871, no. 55). H.A.J. Munro
5. Kettering 1988, 2:440, folio 39, verso, of the Diekamp 1987, 479 – 480, no. D1
of Novar; (sale, Christie’s, London, 1 June 1878, 42
poetry album. no. 77); Sir Joseph Robinson, London (his sale, Notes
6. In The Hague and Münster 1974, 174, no. 52, Christie’s, London, 6 July 1923, no. 94, bought 1. See Kettering 1988, 2:424: The poem, in part, Jan van Duren
this gesture was interpreted differently. There, in); thence by descent to Princess Labia, Cape reads, in translation: “Wine is wonderfully c. 1666/1667, oil on canvas, 81.5 × 65.5 (32 % × 25 ¶)
it was felt that the older woman was pushing Town; (sale, Sotheby’s, London, 7 December good, when men drink with restraint / It Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York,
aside the girl’s garment to reveal her shoulder. 1988); (Agnew’s, London); (Noortman Gallery, warms men’s blood, and it purifies the whole Robert Lehman Collection, 1975 (1975.1.141)
Maastricht) body / It is joyful, it does good, and it makes
7. The black veil is an unusual feature of the Inscription
merry / Very nice. The beloved drink, one sees
girl’s costume. Emilie Gordenker has sug- Exhibitions Signed, lower wall, left of coat: GTB
grow up a green sprig / Named the Bacchus
gested to me, however, that such veils were London 1894, no. 56; London 1958, no. 2;
vine, and there to a priceless spice / It is joyful, Provenance
worn to ward off the cold. She notes that in Zurich 1962, no. 41
it does good, and it makes merry / Through its Jan van Duren, Deventer; by descent to his son,
Autumn Wenslius Hollar depicted his allegori- Literature potency. If the occasion presents, then let us Damiaan van Duren; by descent to his daugh-
cal figure wearing such a headdress. See Rich- Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 120, under no. 8; gladly drink the wine / Wine sometimes makes ter, Elisabeth van Duren, who married Marti-
ard T. Godfrey, Wenceslaus Hollar: A Bohe HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 36, no. 87.2 (as after joy, and it drives away melancholy / It is joyful, nus van Doorninck in 1738; by descent to
mian Artist in London [exh. cat., Yale Center Ter Borch); G 1959 – 1960, 1:134; 2:189, no. 192b it does good, and it makes merry / For every- M. van Doorninck D.Jzn., Deventer, by 1882
for British Art] (New Haven, 1994), 81, repro. (as a copy after Ter Borch); Liedtke 1989, no. 4 one.” (Den wijn is wonderbaer goet, als men and still in 1897; P.W. van Doorninck, Ben-
met maeten drinck bequaem / Hij verwermt nekom and later Colmschate, at least until
8. G 1948 – 1949, 256 – 257.
1909;* C.F.L. de Wild, The Hague; (F. Klein-
9. G 1959 – 1960, 2:187 – 188, made these identifi-
41 het mensen bloet, en hij prugeert t’geheel
lichaem / Hij verheucht, en hij doet deucht, berger Galleries, Paris and New York); Charles
cations. Lady Drinking While Holding a Letter en hij maeckt vreucht / Seer aengenaem / Den Beistegui, Paris, by 1911; (M. Knoedler and Co.,
lieffelijcken dranck, sietmen wassen op een London and New York). Acquired by Philip
10. Kettering 1988, 2:654, folio 122c, recto, of c. 1665, oil on canvas, 38.3 × 34 (15 % × 13 ™)
groen struijck / Genaemt den Bachgus ranck, Lehman in 1912
the family scrapbook. Sinebrychoff Art Museum, Finnish National Gallery,
Helsinki (AII 1531) en daer toe een kostelijck kruit / Hij verheucht, Exhibitions
11. Willem Lormier paired this work with a en hij doet deucht, en hij maeckt vreucht /
Provenance Zwolle 1882, no. 1181; New York 1915, no. 16;
painting by Gabriel Metsu. See Korthals Altes Door sijn fortuijt / Als de ocasij presenteert,
Chevalier de Damery, Paris; Duc de Choiseul, Colorado Springs 1951 – 1953, no. 33; New York
2000 – 2001, 301. I would like to thank Adriaan dan laet ons drincken den wijn blij / Den wijn
Paris (sale, Paris, 6 – 10 April 1772, lot 28 [with 1954; Paris 1957, no. 52; Cincinnati 1959, no. 133,
Waiboer for drawing my attention to this refer- somtijts verheucht, en hij verdrijft melanckolij
pendant]); Louis-François de Bourbon, Prince repro.; New Haven 1960, no. 16, repro.; New
ence. / Hij verheucht, en hij doet deucht, en hij
de Conti (sale, Paris, 8 April-6 June 1777, lot York 1973, no. 11; New York 1991
12. For a discussion of Ter Borch’s reputed maeckt vreucht / Aen allen ’t sij.)
296 [with pendant]); Destouches, Paris, (sale,
students and followers, see G 1959 – 1960, Paris, 21 March 1794, lot 41 [with pendant]); 2. Kettering 1988, 2:425. “De edele soete wijn
2:285 – 294. Prince Alexander Bezborodko, Saint Peters- verquickt des menschen hert / Wanneer hij
13. For a list of these copies, see G 1959 – 1960, burg, to 1799; Count Ilya Bezborodko, Saint maetichlijck met smaeck genuttigh wert sijr.”
2:289 – 290. Petersburg; Countess Lyubov Kushelev, née This poem, added to the end of the drinking
Bezborodko, Saint Petersburg; Count Alexan- song cited in note 1, is based on the book of
der Kushelev-Bezborodko, Saint Petersburg, Ecclesiastes, 31:27, in the Apocrypha.
to 1855; Count Grigory Kushelev-Bezborodko,
Saint Petersburg (sale, Paris, 5 June 1869, lot
35); Mr. Vladimir Tokarev, Saint Petersburg,
209 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 4 9 – 1 5 6
Literature 43 44 3. One of the secretaries, Rutger Tichler, repre-
Moes 1897 – 1905, 1: no. 2190; Hellens 1911, 120; sented the Engestraat ward on the gezworen
Vaillat 1912, 197, repro.; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 Margaretha van Haexbergen, The Town Council of Deventer gemeente until 1666, when Ter Borch took over
(1913): 78 – 79, no. 225; Lehman 1928, no. 99, Wife of Jan van Duren 1667, oil on canvas, 186.2 × 248 (73 & × 97 £) his position (see cat. 45).
repro.; Mayer 1930, 118; Heinrich 1954, 12, 222; Town Hall, City of Deventer
c. 1666/1667, oil on canvas, 81.3 × 65.1 (32 × 25 £) 4. Houck 1901, 54, and see also Dumbar 1732,
G 1959 – 1960, 1:141 – 142, 153, 342, repro.; Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Inscription 103.
2:192 – 193, no. 201; Haverkamp-Begemann 1998, Robert Lehman Collection, 1975 (1975.1.142) Signed: G T Borch A 1667
153 – 159, no. 33, repro.; Kettering 1999a, 57 – 58 5. Dubbe 1982a, 66. Although Dubbe suggests
Provenance Provenance that Ter Borch represented the old paneling, it
Notes Jan van Duren, Deventer; by descent to his son, Town Hall, Deventer is more likely that he deliberately rendered the
* P.W. van Doorninck lent the painting and its Damiaan van Duren; by descent to his daugh-
Exhibitions paneling in a generalized fashion, without
pendant to the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, ter, Elisabeth van Duren, who married Marti-
Zwolle 1882, no. 1179; Deventer 1901, no. 1; detail.
from 1901 to 1909. See Haverkamp-Begemann nus van Doorninck in 1738; by descent to
1988, 153 note 2. Amsterdam 1984, no. 58 6. Kettering 1999a, 55.
M. van Doorninck D. Jzn., Deventer, by 1882
1. On the reverse of this picture, an old label and still in 1897; P.W. van Doorninck, Ben- Literature
7. Dubbe 1982a, 61. The central part of the
reads Jan van Duren, Burgemeester en Cam nekom and later Colmschate, at least until Overijsselsche Almanak 1848, 250; Houck 1899,
paneling, above the dais, survives today. But a
eraar van Deventer. In Deventer, members of 1909;* C.F.L. de Wild, The Hague; (F. Klein- 22 – 28; Houck 1901, 54; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913):
comparison between it and Ter Borch’s render-
the town council were called burgomasters berger Galleries, Paris and New York); Charles 138, no. 455; G 1959 – 1960, 1:142, 345, repro.;
ing shows that he made quite a number of
because the position rotated every two months Beistegui, Paris, by 1911; (M. Knoedler and Co., 2:27, 194 – 195, no. 205; Dubbe 1982a, 61 – 63;
alterations. For example, the eagle in the coat
among the schepenen. See Dumbar 1732, 1:61, London and New York). Acquired by Philip Dubbe 1982b, 367 – 369; Van Thiel and De
of arms at the center turns in the opposite
and Kronenburg 1927, 74. Lehman in November 1912 Bruyn Kops 1995, 273- 274; Kettering 1999a,
direction.
54 – 57
Exhibitions
2. For the identification of the subjects, see 8. Kettering 1998a, 45.
Zwolle 1882, no. 1182; New York 1912, no. 47; Notes
Kettering 1999a, 55 note 34.
New York 1915, no. 17; Colorado Springs 1. Exceptions include G.J.Sibilla’s The Town 9. Kettering 1999a, 50 – 51.
3. Kronenburg 1927, 70 – 80. 1951 – 1952, fig. 33; New York 1954; Paris 1957, Council of Weesp, 1652 (Gemeentemuseum,
10. For a full description of the symbols and
no. 52; Cincinnati 1959, no. 134, repro.; New Weesp) (see Sumowski 1983 – 1994, 6: no. 2439);
4. Kronenburg 1927, 46 – 64. their larger meaning, see Van Thiel and De
Haven 1960, no. 17, repro.; New York 1973, J.A. van Ravesteyn’s Magistraat of The Hague
Bruyn Kops 1995, 273 – 274.
5. About ten years earlier, Ter Borch executed no. 11; New York 1991 Receiving Officers of the Civic Guard, 1618 (Old
a more conventional portrait of Jan van Duren, Stadhuis, The Hague) (see Rudolf E.O. Ekkart, 11. Ter Borch was paid 1,605 guilders; see
Literature
a waist-length rendering on an oval-shaped “De schuttersstukken buiten Amsterdam en G 1959 – 1960, 2:27, 194.
Moes 1897 – 1905, 1: no. 3047; Hellens 1911, 120;
copper support (present location unknown; Haarlem,” in Schutters in Holland: Kracht en
Vaillat 1912, 197, repro.; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 12. The ground on this strip of canvas differs
G 1959 – 1960, 2: no. 150). zenuwen van de stad, eds. M. Carosso-Kok and
(1913): 79, no. 226; Lehman 1928, no. 99, repro.; slightly from the ground used for the rest of
J. Levy-van Halm [exh. cat., Frans Hals-
Mayer 1930, 118; Heinrich 1954, 222; G 1959 – the work, and yet the handling of the paint is
museum] (Haarlem, 1988), 133 – 135, fig. 111);
1960, 1:141 – 142, 153, 343, repro.; 2:193, no. 202; identical.
and E. van Tilburg’s Het Vrije, Bruges, 1659
Haverkamp-Begemann 1998, 153 – 157, no. 34,
(Gerechtshof, Bruges). Only the latter bears 13. Carelessness during the relining process
repro.; Kettering 1999a, 57 – 58
any resemblance to Ter Borch’s group portrait. caused a lot of the black pigments to suffer. But
Notes the lead white used for the faces and still-life
* P.W. van Doorninck lent the painting and 2. The magistraat comprised twelve schepenen
details protected them from the heat of the
its pendant to the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, (aldermen) and four raden (judges or advisors,
iron used for the relining. Milko den Leeuw,
from 1901 to 1909. See Haverkamp-Begemann somewhat less actively involved than their
the restorer of the painting, and Joris Dik plan
1988, 153 note 2. colleagues). The chairmen served for two-
to write an article detailing the discoveries
month periods. Ter Borch depicted Jan Stikke
1. Adriaen van Duren, who served on the town they made during treatment of the canvas
and Jan van Schriek, who functioned in this
council from 1691 to 1702, could possibly have in 2003 and 2004. We would like to thank the
capacity directly after the annual election of
been another son. After Adriaen’s retirement City of Deventer, Noortman Master Painting,
the council on 22 February 1667. Note the fur
from the council in 1703, Damiaan van Duren Maastricht, and Art Handling Services b.v.,
muff in the left hand of Jan Stikke; with his
began serving on the same body. Schiphol, for helping sponsor the conservation
right hand he gestures either to the viewer or
of this painting.
2. Since the Marienburghs married on 7 May to the standing secretary. My thanks to Nina
1661, their portraits were most likely commis- Herweijer and Milko den Leeuw for their help.
sioned for that occasion.
3. On Daniels, see Dubbe 1982b, 361 – 382.
210 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 5 8 – 1 6 4
45 46 47 Notes
1. On the theme of music in Dutch painting,
Self-Portrait Posthumous Portrait of Moses The Music Lesson see (among others) Fischer 1975. For the paral-
c. 1668, oil on canvas, 62.7 × 43.7 (24 § × 17 ^) ter Borch c. 1668/1669, oil on canvas, 86.4 × 70.2 (34 × 27 £) lels between music and love, and particularly
Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, The Hague (177) The Toledo Museum of Art, Purchased with funds from the amorous connotations of musical compa-
Gerard ter Borch and Gesina ter Borch
the Libbey Endowment, Gift of Edward Drummond nies, see A. P. de Mirimonde, “Les sujets musi-
Provenance c. 1668, oil on canvas, 77.5 × 58.5 (30! × 23%)
Libbey (1952.9) caux chez Vermeer de Delft,” Gazette des
Herman Aarentz, Deventer; (sale, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (SK-A-4908)
Inscription Beaux-Arts 57 (1961): 29 – 52; De Jongh in
11 April 1770, no. 10, together with now-lost Provenance
Signed in ligature and dated, on chair, lower Amsterdam 1976, 59 – 61; and The Hague and
portrait of Ter Borch’s wife, both 74 × 49.5 cm); Gesina ter Borch and heirs, Deventer. Thomas
left: GTB 166[?] Antwerp 1994. On the lute as a symbol for
Johan van der Marck and heirs, Amsterdam, Jefferson Bryan [1802 – 1870], New York, 1853;
harmony in love, see De Jongh in Haarlem 1986,
1770 – 1773; (sale, Amsterdam, 25 August 1773, given by Bryan to the New York Historical Provenance
285 – 288.
no. 461); P. Fouquet (sold without pendant); Society, New York, 1867; (sale, New York, (Probably) collection Catherine the Great,
(sale, Brussels, P.F. Tiberghien, 22 May 1827, no. Sotheby’s, 12 January 1995, no. 33) Saint Petersburg, before 1796; Hermitage, Saint 2. See De Jongh 1997, 49 – 50.
308); Mauritshuis Petersburg (874); (Antikvariat, Leningrad,
Exhibitions 3. “Eij hemel vreucht was Ieucht ons t’her / als
Exhibitions 1930); Calouste Gulbenkian, Paris, 1930;
Zwolle 1997, no. 10; Oberlin 2000 t’soet accort vereenicht wert.” The inscription
Zurich 1953, no. 156; Rome and Milan 1954, (Georges Wildenstein, Paris and New York,
accompanying a print by Gillis van Breen after
Literature 1930); (Wildenstein and Co., New York,
no. 16; Oslo 1959, no. 76; Delft and Antwerp Cornelis Ijsbrantsz Kussens of a man playing a
HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 91, no. 276; Moes-Veth 1930 – 1951)
1964 – 1965, no. 9; The Hague 1966, no. 272; lute and a woman playing a violin expounds
1955, 39; G 1959, 309; G 1959 – 1960, 1:360, repro.;
Tokyo and Kyoto 1968 – 1969, no. 7; The Hague Exhibitions on the relative voices of the two instruments,
2:208 – 209, no. 227; Sutton 1986, 176 – 177; Ket-
and Münster 1974, no. 54; Washington Los Angeles 1933, no. 15; Chicago 1934, no. 112; and reflects perhaps a more pragmatic view
tering 1995; Van Dijk 1997; Buvelot 1998, 114
1982 – 1984, no. 8; Zwolle 1997, no. 5; The Hague Cleveland 1936, no. 247; Toronto 1936, no. 10; of marital harmony: “As the sturdy string in
1998, no. 12 Notes Providence 1938, no. 54; Buffalo 1942; New the house, the man’s word must weigh the
1. G 1959 – 1960, 2:38, 285 – 287. York 1942, no. 64; Montreal 1944, no. 90; New heaviest, / The chord is sweet if his wife duti-
Literature
Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): no. 37; HdG 2. Kettering 1988, 2:641 – 644 (Gs 62, fols. York 1945, no. 17; Hartford 1950 – 1951, no. 44; fully bows to it”; see Eddy de Jongh in Amster-
1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 74, no. 204; Moes 1897 – 79 – 86). Kansas City 1967 – 1968, no. 24; The Hague and dam 1997, 97.
1905, no. 874; Houck 1899, 446; G 1959 – 1960, Münster 1974, no. 61; The Hague and San Fran-
3. For his drawings, see Kettering 1988, 4. Compare the melancholic — and utterly
1:144 – 146, 363, repro.; 2:210 – 211, no. 232 cisco 1990 – 1991, no. 10
1:285 – 351. forgotten — “third wheel” in the background
Notes Literature of Johannes Vermeer’s The Girl with the Wine
1. This may be an autograph copy of the self- 4. For a full discussion of the iconography, see Waagen 1864, 193, no. 874; Somov 1895, 2:385, Glass, c. 1659 – 1660 (Staatliche Museen Preus-
portrait that Cosimo III de’Medici, grand duke Kettering 1995. no. 874 (as replica, with incorrect provenance); sischer Kulturbesitz, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin).
of Tuscany (1642 – 1723), commissioned of Ter Vrangel 1909, xviii-xix; Hellens 1911, 126; HdG Brown, referring to the version of the present
5. For example, see the life-size portrait of a
Borch in 1676; see G 1959 – 1960, 2: C 114. Van 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 52, under no. 140 (as “old composition at Waddesdon, identified the
standing military figure surrounded by alle-
der Marck’s collection also included another copy”); Hannema 1943, 104 – 105; Plietzsch 1944, figure as a music teacher intent on instilling
gorical references by Anselm van Hulle, Otta
self-portrait, now lost. See Lugt 2189, and for 52, no. 92; Godwin 1955, 139; White 1959, proper technique; see Brown 1984, 187.
vio Piccolomini d’Aragona, Herzog von Amalfi
Ter Borch’s lost self-portraits, see G 1959 – 1960, 70 – 72; G 1959 – 1960, 1:159 – 160; 2:232, no. 271-II
(1599 – 1656, imperial field marshal and general), 5. The inscription was first noted by Otto
2:260, nos. C 114, C 116 – 120, C 172. (as autograph replica); Waterhouse 1967, 170;
c. 1649 – 1650, oil on canvas, Deutsches Histo- Naumann in 1975, and published in Toledo
Toledo Museum of Art 1976, 26
2. Usually in portraits, the subject wraps the risches Museum, Berlin (Dethlefs 1998, fig. 9). Museum of Art 1976, 26. It should be noted
cloak under one arm, leaving the hands visible. 6. In her testament, Gesina bequeathed a por- that there are pentimenti in the Waddesdon
X-rays suggest that Ter Borch may have started trait of Moses, presumably this one, to her picture as well: the standing figure originally
the composition of the Self-Portrait with this niece and nephews. Houck 1899, 156. sported a fichu, possibly similar to that worn
more conventional posture. My thanks to by his counterpart in the Cincinnati painting
Ariane van Suchtelen for providing me with 7. Catalogue of the Bryan Gallery of Christian (see Waterhouse 1967, 170).
this information, through her entry on the Self- Art (New York, 1853), 11, no. 147 (as Portrait
Portrait for a forthcoming catalogue. of Willem, prince of Orange, later king of
England).
3. G 1959 – 1960, 2:260, no. C 115 (HdG
1907 – 1927, 5 [1913]: 74 – 75, 205).
211 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 6 5 – 1 7 2
48 Broos in The Hague and San Francisco 49 Notes
1990 – 1991, 179; Franits 1993, 53, repro.; Ketter- * “Le portrait, à mi-corps, d’un jeune seigneur
The Music Party ing 1993/1997, 114 – 115; Kettering 1995, 326 Gerbrand Pancras hollandais, ayant la tête nue, la main gauche
c. 1668/1670, oil on panel, 58.1 × 47.3 (22 ¢ × 18 £) 1670, oil on canvas, 33.4 × 27.8 (13 ¡ × 10 •) sur la hanche, la droite appuyée sur un bâton,
Notes
Cincinnati Art Museum, Bequest of Mary M. Emery Manchester City Galleries (1979.447) et portant une veste de drap d’argent sous un
1. See Edwin Buijsen, “Music in the Age of
(1927.421) habit gris garni de noeuds de ruban. Son cha-
Vermeer,” in Dutch Society in the Age of Ver Inscription
Provenance peau orné d’un panache est posé sur une table
meer, eds. Donald Haks and Marie Christine Signed, center right: GTB; inscribed,
Floris Drabbe (sale, Leiden, 1 April 1743 [to à côté de lui. T[oile]. 12p[ouces] × 10 p[ouces].”
van der Sman [exh. cat., Haags Historisch Ætatis 12. / 1670
Dirk Dalens]); Pieter Leendert de Neufville It is worth noting in this context that Ter
Museum] (The Hague, 1996), especially 110 –
Provenance Borch’s portraits of Gerbrand’s parents,
(sale, Amsterdam, 19 June 1765, no. 101 [to van 113, and D. J. Balfoort, Het Muziekleven in
([Possibly] sale, Paris [Laneauville, Henry], Nicolaes Pancras and Petronella de Waert,
Diemen]); Nicolaas Doekscheer (sale, Amster- Nederland in de 17de en 18de eeuw, 2d ed.
9 – 11 April 1822, no. 69 ).* Mr. and Mrs. Edgar also appeared in public sales in the first part
dam, 9 September 1789, no. 7 [to C. Ploos van (The Hague, 1981).
Assheton Bennett, London, by 1938; on loan to of the nineteenth century, indicating that they
Amstel]); Pieter Smeth van Alphen (sale,
2. See Nevitt 2003. the City Art Gallery from 1965; bequeathed by too had left the family’s possession by this
Amsterdam, 1 – 2 August 1810, no. 100 [to
them to the City Art Gallery in 1979 time; see G 1959 – 1960, 2:217 – 218, nos. 242-I
Yver]); (sale, Du Prieul, Paris [Lebrun], 25 3. A useful survey is provided in The Hague
November 1811, no. 51 [to Lebrun]). Prince Exhibitions and 243-I.
and Antwerp 1994; additional references are
Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand (sale, Henry, cited in cat. 47 note 1. London 1938, no. 256; Amsterdam 1952, no. 18; 1. According to Grossmann 1965, this identifi-
Paris, 7 – 9 September 1817, no. 39). Possibly London 1952 – 1953, no. 393; Hull 1961, no. 98; cation was made by A. M. Hind, though no
4. See, in addition to A Woman Playing the London 1965, no. 9; The Hague and Münster
(William Buchanan, London) to John Webb, further source is given. A likeness of the prince
Theorbo for a Cavalier, c. 1658 (fig. 1), The Music 1974, no. 55; London 1983b, no. 4; New York
London, 1817; but more likely to Alexander at age eleven is included in Abraham van den
Lesson, c. 1668 (oil on canvas, 66 × 53.5 cm, The 1984, no. 4; Birmingham 1989, no. 41; London
Baring, later 1st Lord Ashburton, The Grange, Temple’s Portrait of Albertina Agnes, Princess
J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 97.PA.47); 1999
Alresford, Hants. and London, by 1819; by of Orange-Nassau and Her Children, 1668
The Duet: Woman Singing and Man Playing the
descent (sale, The Grange, 1891; collection sold Literature (Fries Museum, Leeuwaarden, On loan from
Theorbo, c. 1669 (oil on canvas, 82.5 × 72 cm,
en bloc to L. Agnew and A. Wertheimer); Lord Plietzsch 1944, under no. 85; G 1959 – 1960, the Instituut Collectie Nederland).
Musée du Louvre, Paris, 1900); and Musical
Alfred Charles de Rothschild, London, by 1902; 1:148 – 149, 369, repro.; 2:215 – 216, no. 239 (as
Company, c. 1670 (oil on canvas, 58 × 46 cm, 2. G 1959 – 1960, 1:148 – 149.
[bequeathed to?] Lady Carnarvon, London, Hendrik Casimir II von Nassau-Dietz); Gross-
Staatliche Museen, Kassel).
until at least 1922; (Duveen, New York); Mary mann 1965, 10, no. 9; Manchester City Art 3. Dudok van Heel 1983, 66 – 67; and Dudok van
M. Emery, Cincinnati, 1924; bequeathed by her 5. As noted by Kettering 1993/1997, 115. Ter Gallery 1980, 12; Dudok van Heel 1983, 66 – 67; Heel 1993, 130.
to the museum, 1927 Borch originally depicted the woman in the Dudok van Heel 1993; Kettering 1999a, 66 – 67
4. Kettering 1999a, 66.
Exhibitions Cincinnati painting with raised lids, her gaze
London 1819, no. 33 (as The Music Master); less discreetly lowered. 5. Kettering 1999a, 66 – 69.
London 1871, no. 181; London 1890, no. 72; 6. My thanks to Patti Favero, Kress Fellow in 6. On the deliberate promotion of native Eng-
London 1922, no. 18; Detroit 1925, no. 29; paintings conservation at the Cincinnati Art lish fashion over French imports during the
Columbus 1950, no. 34; Columbus 1956, no. 29; Museum, for her close examination and metic- late 1660s and its rapid dissemination to conti-
The Hague and Münster 1974, no. 60; Fort ulous tracing of the figure in the Cincinnati nental Europe, see Diana de Marly, Louis XIV
Worth 1991 – 1992, no. 11 painting; and to Larry Nichols, curator of and Versailles (London, 1987), 40 – 42.
Literature European paintings and sculpture before 1900
Hoet 1752, 2:75; Descamps 1753 – 1754, 2:127; at the Toledo Museum of Art, for facilitating
Terwesten 1770, 475, no. 99; Buchanan 1824, the tracing of the figure in their picture.
2: 340, no. 39; Smith 1829 – 1842, 4 (1833): 116, 7. No evidence of pouncing or tracing was
no. 2; Waagen 1854, 2:104; Villars 1902, 23; found in infra-red examination of the Cincin-
Hellens 1911, 124; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): nati painting.
49 – 50, no. 134; Emery 1930, 9; Alfred Scharf
in Valentiner 1930, no. 56; Plietzsch 1944, 54,
no. 93; Cincinnati Art Museum 1956, 53;
G 1959 – 1960, 1:159, 393, repro.; 2:230 – 231,
no. 270; Rosenberg, Slive, and Ter Kuile 1972,
223 – 224; Brown 1974, 291; Zimmerman and
Brown 1974, 623 – 624; Cincinnati Art Museum
1984, 110; Peter Sutton in Philadelphia, Berlin,
and London 1984, xlv; Scott 1987, 24 – 27; Ben
212 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 7 4 – 1 7 9
50 4. Bode 1906, 79, noted that Ter Borch was able Provenance 6. Van der Veen 2001.
to retain his remarkable artistic abilities to the C. van Sypesteyn, The Hague, 1914; C. van
Young Man Reading end of his life: “Dass Ter Borch nächst Rem- Sypesteyn, Loosdrecht; D.A. Hoogendyk,
7. Van der Veen 2001, 150 – 151.
c. 1680, oil on panel, 40.3 × 34.4 (15 ¢ × 13 ∞) brandt die bedeutendste, stärkste malerische Amsterdam, 1929; Gustav Gerstenberger, 8. De Winkel 1995.
The Detroit Institute of Arts, City of Detroit Purchase Begabung der holländischen Kunst war, zeigt Chemnitz, 1930; Henry Janssen, Reading, Pa.,
9. De Winkel 1995, 161, 167 note 69. De Winkel
(29.256) sich auch darin, dass seine künstlerische Kraft by descent to Helen Janssen Wetzel (sale,
notes that these gowns were imported by the
Provenance bis in sein Alter die gleiche bleibt.” Sotheby’s, New York, 9 October 1980, no. 18);
Dutch East India Company from the 1640s on.
Probably sale, Amsterdam, 5 June 1754, no. 113; (H. Shickman Gallery, New York)
probably H. Wannaar sale, Amsterdam, 17 10. Ter Kuile 1974, 30 – 31 note 8. According to
Exhibition
April 1757, no. 21. (Henry Reinhardt & Son,
51 Berlin 1929, no. 94
Ter Kuile, Ms. M.C. de Jong, of the Nederlands
New York); purchased by museum in 1929 Costuummuseum in The Hague, noted that the
Lucretia Rouse, Wife of the Preacher Literature costume was unusual and not in fashion in
Exhibitions Jan van Duren Moonen 1700, 682; Houck 1899, 13; HdG about 1680. Ter Kuile also notes that an etch-
Detroit 1929, no. 71; Raleigh 1959, no. 92; 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 78, no. 223; Von Falke ing after Ter Borch’s painting of The Concert in
1680, oil on canvas, 78.5 × 64 (30 ¢ × 25 ^)
Frankfurt 1993 – 1994, no. 13 1929 – 1930, 232 – 236, repro.; G 1959 – 1960, 1:410, Berlin (791 G) depicts the woman playing the
Collection Rijksmuseum Twenthe, Enschede (0123)
Literature repro.; 2:241, no. 292 spinet wearing a comparable headdress (see
Provenance
Probably HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): 41, no. 105a; Notes G 1959 – 1960, 1:163). This figure was later
C. van Sypesteyn, The Hague, 1914; C. van
Valentiner 1929, 2 – 3; Detroit Institute of Arts 1. Berlin 1929, no. 36. painted out and replaced by a boy with a
Sypesteyn, Loosdrecht; (D.A. Hoogendyk,
1930, no. 221; G 1959 – 1960, 1:407, repro.; 2:240, wide-brimmed hat.
Amsterdam, 1929); acquired by museum in 1933 2. See Rietstap 1954, 5: pl. cc, for the coat of
no. 289; Detroit Institute of Arts 1966, 144;
arms of the Rouse family, and Rietstap 1954, 11. The following text from Moonen’s Poëzy
Sutton 1986, 88 Exhibition
2: pl. ccxli, for the coat of arms for the Van (see note 3) is taken from Ter Kuile 1974, 30
Berlin 1929, no. 95
Notes Duren family. note 7: “Wat maelt Lukretië, mijn amptgenoots
1. The young man has often been described as Literature gemael, Naer ’t leven helderst af? Is ’t zedigheit
reading a letter. See Frankfurt 1993 – 1994, 156, Moonen 1700, 682; Houck 1899, 13; Moes 3. Moonen 1700, 682, 688. The references to van taal, Of kloekheit van vernuft, of staetigh
no. 13. 1897 – 1905, 2: no. 6571; HdG 1907 – 1927, 5 (1913): Moonen’s poetry book were initially made by git van oogen? Gewis dit driespan is van onge-
78, no. 224; Von Falke 1929 – 1930, 232 – 236, Houck 1899, 12 – 13. meen vermogen. Maer ’s Ridders geest treft
2. Although the great majority of publishers
repro.; G 1959 – 1960, 1:411, repro.; 2:241, 4. This biographical information is taken from hier meest d’aendacht van haer ziel, Die Gode
and booksellers were situated in the province
no. 293; Ter Kuile 1974, 30, no. 49 Ter Kuile 1974, 30. en haeren man vroeg in de jugd beviel. 1681.”
of Holland, books and pamphlets were widely
distributed throughout the Netherlands. For 5. G 1959 – 1960, 1:30. Trip sought to have Ter 12. G 1959 – 1960, 1:377 – 378, repro.; 2:221,
information on publishing in about 1650, see Borch portray him in a manner similar to his nos. 250 – 251.
Frijhoff and Spies 1999, 268 – 271. 52 portrayal of Willem III, prince of Orange, 13. G 1959 – 1960, 1:379, repro.; 2: 222 – 223,
3. G 1959 – 1960, 2:240, no. 289. The Preacher Jan van Duren which the artist had just executed in The no. 253.
Hague. This document is very interesting,
1681, oil on canvas, 78.1 × 63.8 (30 # × 25 ¡) for Ter Borch agreed to paint this portrait in
Collection Richard and Marcia Ehrlich, Beverly Hills
exchange for a coach. The document also stip-
Inscription ulated that if Ter Borch died before completing
Signed, on binding of book on bookshelf: the portrait, Trip would receive recompense to
GTBorch 16— the value of 100 silver ducats. Indeed, Ter
Borch did not complete the portrait, and in
1682 Trip received portraits of both the prince
and princess of Orange in recompense (see
G 1959 – 1960, 1:33).
213 n o t e s t o p a g e s 1 8 0 – 1 8 3
Bibliography Adams 1985 Baudelaire 1964 Bode 1923
Adams, Ann Jensen. “The Paintings of Thomas Baudelaire, Charles. The Painter of Modern Life Bode, Wilhelm von. Die Meister der holländ
de Keyser (1596/7 – 1667): A Study of Portrai- and other Essays. Ed. and trans. J. Mayne. Lon- ischen und vlämischen Malerschulen. Leipzig,
ture in Seventeenth Century Amsterdam.” don, 1964. 1923.
4 vols. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1985.
Baumstark 1980 Bode 1925
Adams 1993 – 1994 Baumstark, Reinhold. Meisterwercke der Samm Bode, Wilhem von. “Kunsthistorische Aus-
Adams, Ann Jensen. “Der Sprechende Brief: lungen des Fürsten von Liechtenstein. Gemälde. beute aus dem deutschen Kunsthandel von
Kunst des Lesens, Kunst des Schreibens. Zurich and Munich, 1980. Heute. 1. Gerard Terborch.” Repertorium für
Schriftkunde und schoonschrijft in den Nieder- Kunstwissenschaft 46 (1925), 109 – 118.
Bazin 1958
landen im 17. Jahrhundert.” In Frankfurt
Bazin, G. Musée de l’Ermitage: Les grands Bol 1962
1993 – 1994, 69 – 92.
maîtres de la peinture. Paris, 1958. Bol, L. J. “Helena van der Schalcke als kind.”
Adams 1999 Openbaar Kunstbezit 6 (1962), no. 32.
Beall 1975
Adams, Ann. “Money and the Regulation of
Beall, Karen Friedmann. Kaufrufe und Stras Bolten 1985
Desire: The Prostitute and the Marketplace in
senhandler: Eine Bibliographie. Hamburg, 1975. Bolten, J. Method and Practice: Dutch and
Seventeenth-Century Holland.” In Renaissance
Flemish Drawing Books, 1600 – 1750. Landau,
Culture and the Everyday. Eds. Patricia Fumer- Beck 1972 – 1973
1985.
ton and Simon Hunt. Philadelphia, 1999, Beck, Hans-Ulrich. Jan van Goyen. 2 vols.
229 – 253. Amsterdam, 1972 – 1973. Borger 1996
See Naarden 1996.
Aitzema 1650 Beurs 1692
Aitzema, Lieuwe van. Verhael van de Neder Beurs, Willem. De groote waereld in ’t kleen Brandt 1928
lantsche vreede-handeling. The Hague, 1650. geschildert.... Amsterdam, 1692. Brandt, Paul. Schaffende Arbeit in bildende
Kunst. Leipzig, 1928.
Alpers 1997 Blankert 1995
Alpers, Svetlana. “Picturing Dutch Culture.” In Blankert, Albert. “Vermeer’s Modern Themes Bredius 1915 – 1922
Franits 1997, 57 – 67, 211 – 213. and Their Tradition.” In Washington and The Bredius, A. Künstler-Inventare: Urkunden zur
Hague 1995 – 1996, 31 – 45. Geschichte der holländischen Kunst des XVIten,
Alte Pinakothek 1983
XVIIten, und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts.
Alte Pinakothek München. Munich, 1983. Bock 1998
8 vols. The Hague, 1915 – 1922.
Bock, Henning, et al. The Gemäldegalerie
Amman and Sachs 1973
Berlin: 200 Masterworks. Berlin, 1998. Brejon de Lavergnée, et al. 1979
Amman, Jost, and Hans Sachs. The Book of
Brejon de Lavergnée, Arnauld, Jacques Foucart,
Trades. With an introduction by B.A. Rifkin. Bode 1883
and Nicole Reynaud. Catalogue sommaire
New York, 1973. Bode, Wilhelm von. Studien zur Geschichte der
illustré des peintures du Musée du Louvre I:
Holländischen Malerei. Braunschweig, 1883.
Angel 1642 Écoles flamande et hollandaise. Paris, 1979.
Angel, Philips. Lof der schilder-konst. Leiden, Bode 1894
Bremmer and Roodenburg 1991
1642. Bode, Wilhelm von. “Die kleinmeister der
Bremmer, Jan, and Herman Roodenburg.
holländischen Schule in der Galerie des
Angel 1996 A Cultural History of Gesture from Antiquity
Fürsten von Liechtenstein.” Die graphischen
Angel, Philips. “Praise of Painting.” Trans. to the Present Day. Cambridge, 1991.
Künste 17 (1894), 79 – 102.
Michael Hoyle, with an introduction and com-
Brockwell 1922
mentary by H. Miedema. Simiolus 24 (1996), Bode 1900
Brockwell, Maurice W. “ ‘A Lady Spinning,’ by
227 – 258. Bode, Wilhelm von. Gemälde-Sammlung des
Gerard Terborch.” The Connoiseur 62 (1922): 48.
Herrn Rudolf Kann in Paris. Vienna, 1900.
Baetjer 1995
Brockwell 1932
Baetjer, Katharine. European Paintings in the Bode 1906
Brockwell, Maurice W. Abridged Catalogue of
Metropolitan Museum of Art by Artists Born Bode, Wihelm von. Rembrandt und seine Zeit
the Pictures at Doughty House, Richmond,
before 1865: A Summary Catalogue. 3 vols. New genossen. Leipzig, 1906.
Surrey, in the Collection of Sir Herbert Cook,
York, 1995.
Bode 1919 Bart. London, 1932.
Basan 1771 Bode, Wilhelm von. Die Meister der holländ
Broos 1987
Basan, François. Recueil d’estampes gravées ischen und vlämischen Malerschulen. Leipzig,
Broos, Ben. Meesterwerken in het Mauritshuis.
d’apres les tableaux du Cabinet de Mon 1919.
The Hague, 1987.
seigneur le Duc de Choiseul. Paris, 1771.
214
Brown 1974 Cincinnati Art Museum 1956 Dickey 2002 Dudok van Heel 1993
Brown, Christopher. “Gerard ter Borch at The Guide to the Collections of the Cincinnati Art Dickey, Stephanie. “Rembrandt and Saskia: Art, Dudok van Heel, S. A. C. “Ter Borchs Portret
Hague and Münster.” The Burlington Magazine Museum. Cincinnati, 1956. Commerce, and the Poetics of Portraiture.” In van Gerbrand Pancras (1658 – 1716), of hoe
116 (May 1974), 288 – 292. Rethinking Rembrandt. Eds. Alan Chong and ongemakkelijk was de prins?” Amstelodamum
Cincinnati Art Museum 1984
Michael Zell. Boston and Zwolle, 2002, 16 – 47. 80 (November/December 1993), 128 – 130.
Brown 1984 Masterpieces from the Cincinnati Art Museum.
Brown, Christopher. Images of a Golden Past, Cincinnati, 1984. Van Dijk 1997 Dumbar 1732
Dutch Genre Painting of the 17th Century. New Dijk, Lydie van. “Zwolse schilders in de zeven- Dumbar, G. Het kerkelyk en wereltlyk Deventer.
Cleveland Museum of Art 1982
York, 1984. tiende eeuw: kracht in variatie.” In Zwolle in de 2 vols. Deventer, 1732.
The Cleveland Museum of Art Catalogue of
Gouden Eeuw, cultuur en schilderkunst. Eds.
Bruyn 1959 Paintings, Part Three: European Paintings of Durantini 1983
Jean Streng and Lydie van Dijk. Zwolle, 1997,
Bruyn, Josua. “Gerard ter Borch (1617 – 1681). the 16th, 17th, and 18th Centuries. Cleveland, Durantini, Mary Frances. The Child in Seven
45 – 48.
Moederlijk zorghen.” Openbaar Kunstbezit 3 1982. teenth Century Dutch Painting. Ann Arbor,
(1959), 6a – b. Dixon 1995 1983.
Cook 1905
Dixon, Laurinda S. Perilous Chastity: Women
Bryan Gallery of Christian Art 1853 Cook, H. “La collection de Sir Francis Cook, Van Eikema Hommes 1999
and Illness in Pre-Enlightenment Art and Med
Catalogue of the Bryan Gallery of Christian Visconde de Monserrate.” Les Arts 4 (1905), 30. Eikema Hommes, M. van, J. de Bruijn, E. Her-
icine. Ithaca and London, 1995.
Art. New York, 1853. mens, and A. Wallert, “Still-Life Sources.” In
Demoed 1998
Dobrzycka 1966 Amsterdam 1999, 25 – 38.
Buchanan 1824 Demoed, H.B. “Gerard ter Borch en de Vrede
Dobrzycka, A. Jan van Goyen 1596 – 1656.
Buchanan, William. Memoirs of Painting, with van Münster.” Gelders Erfgoed 4 (1998), 1 – 5. Ekkart 1995
Poznan, 1966.
a Chronological History of the Importation of Ekkart, Rudi. Dutch Portraits from the Seven
Descamps 1753 – 1764
Pictures by the Great Masters into England Dreyfus 1909 teenth Century: Own Collection. Rotterdam,
Descamps, Jean-Baptiste. La vie des peintres
since the French Revolution. 2 vols. London, Dreyfus, Carle. “Collection de Mme la mar- 1995 (Catalogue of portraits in the Museum
flamandes, allemand, et hollandois. 4 vols.
1824. quise de Ganay, née Ridgeway.” Les Arts 96 Boymans-van Beuningen).
Paris, 1753 – 1764.
(1909), 4.
Burroughs 1931 Elkins 1900
Dethlefs 1996
Burroughs, Bryson. Catalogue of Paintings in Drost 1926 Elkins, William L. Catalogue of Paintings in
Dethlefs, Gerd. “Die Friedensstifter der christ-
the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, Drost, W. Barockmalerei in den Germanischen the Private Collection of W. L. Elkins: “Elstowe,”
lichen Welt. Bildnisgalerien und Portraitwerke
1931. Ländern. Potsdam, 1926. Elkins, Montg. Co., Pa. 2 vols. Paris, 1900.
auf die Gesandten der westfälischen Friedens-
Buvelot 1998 verhandlungen.” In “...zu einem stets währen Dubbe 1982a Emery 1930
Buvelot, Q. Tableaux flamands et hollandais den Gedächtnis,” Die Friedenssäle in Münster Dubbe, B. “Het Stadhuisinterieur en voor A Catalogue of the Collection of Paintings
du Musée Fabre de Montpellier. Paris, 1998. und Osnabrück und ihre Gesandtenporträts. werpen uit het oud bezit van de stad Deventer.” Assembled by Mrs. Thomas J. Emery and
Eds. Karl-Georg Kaster and Gerd Steinwascher. In In en om het Deventer Stadhuis. Ed. A.C.F. Bequeathed by Her to the Cincinnati Museum
La Caze 1871
Bramsche, 1996, 101 – 172. Koch. Deventer, 1982, 53 – 77. Association. Cincinnati, 1930.
Notice des tableaux légués au Musée national
du Louvre par Louis La Caze. Paris, 1871. Dethlefs 1998 Dubbe 1982b Faber and De Bruin 1998
Dethlefs, Gerd. “Kunst und Literatur wärhrend Dubbe, B. “De Deventer beeldhouwer Derck Faber, Dirk E.A., and Renger E. de Bruin.
Chapman 2000
der Verhandlungen um den Westfälischen Daniels (1632 – 1710).” Antiek 16 (January 1982), “Tegen de vrede, De Utrechtse ambassadeur
Chapman, Perry. “Propagandist Prints, Reaf-
Frieden.” In Städte und Friedenskongresse. 361 – 382. Godard van Reede van Nederhorst en de
firming Paintings: Art and Community during
Ed. Heinz Duchhardt. Cologne and Vienna, onderhandelingen in Münster.” In 1648, Vrede
the Twelve Years’ Truce.” In The Public and Duchhardt 1998
1998, 101 – 172. van Munster, feit en verbeelding. Ed. Jacques
Private in Dutch Culture of the Golden Age. Duchhardt, Heinz. Der Westfälische Friede:
Dane. Zwolle, 1998, 107 – 137.
Eds. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. and Adele Seeff. Detroit Institute of Arts 1930 Diplomatie, politische Zäsur, kulturelles
Newark, Del., 2000, 43 – 63 (Papers presented Catalogue of Paintings. Detroit, 1930. Umfeld, Rezeptionsgeschichte. Munich, 1998. Von Falke 1929 – 1930
at a symposium held at the Center for Renais- Falke, Otto von. “Berlin.” Pantheon 3
Detroit Institute of Arts 1966 Dudok van Heel 1983
sance and Baroque Studies, University of (1929 – 1930), 232 – 236.
Treasures from The Detroit Institute of Arts. Dudok van Heel, S. A. C. “In Presentie van de
Maryland, 1993).
Detroit, 1966. Heer Gerard ter Borgh.” In Essays in Northern Fehl 1997
Chong 1993 European Art Presented to Egbert Haverkamp- Fehl, Philipp. Sprezzatura and the Art of Paint
Detroit Institute of Arts 1979
Chong, Alan. European and American Paint Begemann on His Sixtieth Birthday. Doorn- ing Finely: Open-Ended Narration in Paintings
Selected Works from The Detroit Institute of
ings in The Cleveland Museum of Art: A Sum spijk, 1983, 66 – 71. by Apelles, Raphael, Michelangelo, Titian,
Arts. Detroit, 1979.
mary Catalogue. Cleveland, 1993. Rembrandt, and Ter Borch. Groningen, 1997.
215 b i b l i o g r a p h y
Felius 2002 G 1948 Giltaij 1994 Hannema 1962
Felius, Marlius. “Schoone koeijen.” In Apel- Gudlaugsson, Sturla J. “Adriaen Pauw’s intocht Giltaij, Jeroen, et al. De verzameling van de Hannema, Dirk. Beschrijvende catalogus van
doorn 2002, 18 – 35. te Münster, een gemeenschappelijk werk van Stichting Willem van der Vorm in het Museum de schilderijen uit de kunstverzameling Sticht
Gerard ter Borch en Gerard van der Horst.” Boymans-van Beuningen Rotterdam. Rotter- ing Willem van der Vorm. Rotterdam, 1962.
Filedt Kok 2001
Oud Holland 63 (1948), 39 – 47. dam, 1994.
Filedt Kok, Jan Piet, ed. Netherlandish Art Haverkamp-Begemann 1965
1600 – 1700. Amsterdam, 2001. G 1948 – 1949 Godwin 1955 Haverkamp-Begemann, E. “Terborch’s Lady of
Gudlaugsson, Sturla J. “De datering van de Godwin, Blake-More. Toledo Museum of Art, the Toilet.” Art News 64 (December 1965),
Fischer 1975
schilderijen van Gerard Ter Borch.” Neder Catalogue of European Paintings. Toledo, 1955. 38 – 41, 62 – 63.
Fischer, Peter. Music in Paintings of the Low
lands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 2 (1948 – 1949),
Countries in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Van der Goes and De Meyere 1996 Haverkamp-Begemann 1980
235 – 267.
Amsterdam, 1975. Goes, André van der, and Jos de Meyere, eds. Haverkamp-Begemann, Egbert. “Dutch and
G 1959 Op stand aan de wand: Vijf eeuwen familie Flemish Masters of the Seventeenth Century.”
Fock 2001a
Gudlaugsson, Sturla J. “Einige Ausnahmefälle portretten in Slot Zuylen. Maarssen, 1996. Apollo 111 (March 1980), 202 – 211.
Fock, C. Willemijn, ed. Het Nederlandse inter
in der Bildnisgestaltung Ter Borchs.” Fest
ieur in beeld 1600 – 1900. Zwolle, 2001. Gordenker 2001 Haverkamp-Begemann 1998
schrift Friedrich Winkler. Berlin, 1959, 306 – 312.
Gordenker, Emilie. Van Dyck and the Represen Haverkamp-Begemann, Egbert. “The Nether-
Fock 2001b
G 1959 – 1960 tation of Dress in Seventeenth-Century Portrai lands, Seventeenth-Century Paintings.” In
Fock, C. Willemijn. “Semblance or Reality? The
Gudlaugsson, Sturla J. Geraert ter Borch. 2 vols. ture. Turnhout, 2001. The Robert Lehman Collection, 2, Fifteenth-
Domestic Interior in Seventeenth-Century
The Hague, 1959 – 1960. to Eighteenth-Century European Paintings.
Dutch Genre Painting.” In Denver and Newark De Graaf 1958
New York, 1998, 125 – 167.
2001 – 2002, 83 – 101. Gaehtgens 1987 Graaf, J.A. van de. Het De Mayerne Manuscript
Gaehtgens, Barbara. Adriaen van der Werff als bron voor de schilderkunst van de barok. HdG 1907 – 1927
Francis 1944
1659 – 1722. Munich, 1987. Utrecht, 1958. Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue
Francis, Henry S. “Paintings in the Prentiss
Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent
Bequest.” The Bulletin of the Cleveland Gaskell 1984 Groeneweg 1995
Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century.
Museum of Art 31 (June 1944), 87 – 89. Gaskell, Ivan. “Tobacco, Social Deviance and Groeneweg, Irene. “Regenten in het zwart:
8 vols. London, 1907 – 1927. Trans. from the
Dutch Art in the Seventeenth Century.” In Hol vroom en deftig?” In Beeld en zelfbeeld in de
Franits 1993 German edition, Beschreibendes und kritisches
ländische Genremalerei im 17. Jahrhundert: Nederlandse Kunst, 1550 – 1750. Eds. Reindert
Franits, Wayne E. Paragons of Virtue: Women Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten
Symposium Berlin 1984. Eds. Henning Bock Falkenburg, et al. Nederlands Kunsthistorisch
and Domesticity in Seventeenth-Century Dutch holländischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts.
and Thomas W. Gaehtgens. Berlin, 1984, Jaarboek 46 (1995), 198 – 251.
Art. Cambridge, 1993. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907 – 1928.
117 – 138.
Grossmann 1965
Franits 1997 Hecht 1998
Gaskell 1990 Grossmann, F.G. Catalogue of Paintings and
Franits, Wayne E. Looking at Seventeenth- Hecht, P. “Rembrandt and Raphael Back to
Gaskell, Ivan. Seventeenth-Century Dutch and Drawings from the Assheton Bennett Collec
Century Dutch Art, Realism Reconsidered. Back: The Contribution of Thoré.” Simiolus 26
Flemish Painting: The Thyssen-Bornemisza tion. Manchester, 1965.
Cambridge, 1997. (1998), 162 – 178.
Collection. London, 1990.
Van Hall 1963
Franits 2001 Heinrich 1954
Geffroy 1900 Hall, H. van. Repertorium van Portretten van
Franits, Wayne E., ed. “Vermeer: An Overview Heinrich, Theodore Allen. “The Lehman Col-
Geffroy, G. La Hollande (Les Musées d’Europe, Nederlandse beeldende kunstenaars. Amster-
of His Life and Stylistic Development.” In The lection.” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin
4), Paris, n.d. [1900]. dam, 1963.
Cambridge Companion to Vermeer. Cambridge 12 (1954), 217 – 232.
and New York, 2001, 8 – 26. Gemäldegalerie, Berlin 1932 Hannema 1943
Helgerson 2000
Die Holländischen Meister, 17. und 18. Jahrhun Hannema, Frans. Gerard Terborch. Amster-
Franits 2004 Helgerson, Richard. “Soldiers and Enigmatic
dert: 370 Abbildungen. Berlin, 1932. dam, 1943.
Franits, Wayne. Seventeenth-Century Dutch Girls.” In Adulterous Alliances, Home, State,
Genre Painting: Its Thematic and Stylistic Gemäldegalerie, Berlin 1975 Hannema 1950 and History in Early Modern European Drama
Evolution. New Haven (forthcoming). Katalog der ausgestellten Gemalde des 13.– 18. Hannema, Dirk. Catalogue of the Pictures and Painting. Chicago, 2000, 79 – 119.
Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1975. in the Collection of Willem van der Vorm.
Frascina 1993 Hellens 1911
Rotterdam, 1950.
Frascina, F., et al. Modernity and Modernism, Gerson 1975 Hellens, Franz. Gerard Terborch. Brussels, 1911.
French Painting in the Nineteenth Century. Gerson, H. Hollandse portretschilders van de Hannema 1958
Hermitage 1863 – 1916
New Haven, 1993. zeventiende eeuw. Maarssen, 1975. Hannema, Dirk. Catalogus van de schilderijen
Katalog kartinnoi galerei Imperatorskogo Ermi
uit de kunstverzameling Stichting Willem van
Frijhoff and Spies 1999 Getty Museum 1984 tazha. Saint Petersburg-Petrograd, 1863 – 1916
der Vorm. Rotterdam, 1958.
Frijhoff, Willem, and Marijke Spies. 1650: “Acquisitions/1983.” J. Paul Getty Museum (Catalogue of the paintings gallery of the
Bevochten eendracht. The Hague, 1999. Journal 12 (1984), 311. Imperial Hermitage).
216
Van Heugten 1988 Hope 1898 Jowell 1974 Kettering 1999a
Heugten, Sjraar van. “Grazende modellen: The Hope Collection of Pictures of the Dutch Jowell, Frances Suzman. “Thoré-Bürger and Kettering, Alison M. “Gerard ter Borch’s
Aspecten van het Nederlandse veestuk.” In and Flemish Schools. London, 1898. the Revival of Frans Hals.” The Art Bulletin 56 Portraits for the Deventer Elite.” Simiolus 27
Dordrecht and Leeuwarden 1988, 10 – 55. (1974), 101 – 117. (1999), 46 – 69.
Höss 1908
Hochstrasser 1995 Höss, Karl. Fürst Johann II. von Liechtenstein Kann 1907 Kettering 1999b
Hochstrasser, Julie Berger. “Life and Still Life: und die bildende Kunst. Vienna, 1908. Sedelmeyer, Charles. Catalogue of the Rodolphe Kettering, Alison M. “The ‘War-Painting’ in
A Cultural Inquiry into Seventeenth-Century Kann Collection. 2 vols. Paris, 1907. the Netherlands after the Peace of Münster
Houbraken 1753
Dutch Still-Life Painting.” Ph.D. diss., Univer- and Osnabrück.” In 1648, Paix de Westphalie,
Houbraken, Arnold. De groote schouburgh der Kaulbach 1998
sity of California at Berkeley, 1995. L’Art Entre la Guerre et la Paix. Paris, 1999,
Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen. Kaulbach, Hans-Martin. “The Portrayal of
513 – 540 (Acts of a colloquium organized by
Hoekstra 1991 3 vols. The Hague, 1753. Reprint, Amsterdam, Peace Before and After 1648.” In Münster and
the Westfaelisches Landesmuseum and the
Hoekstra, Rozemarijn. “Mode of Fantasie in de 1976. Osnabrück 1998, 2:598 – 603.
Louvre, Paris, 1998).
17e eeuw. Een onderzoek naar het realiteitsge-
Houck 1899 Kelch 1975
halte van het vrouwen kostuum op 17e eeuwse Kettering 2000
Houck, M.E. Mededeelingen betreffende Ger Kelch, Jan. Catalogue of Paintings, 13th – 18th
genrestukken en portretten aan de hand van Kettering, Alison M. “Gerard ter Borch’s Mili-
hard ter Borch, Robert van Voerst, Pieter van Century. 2d rev. ed. Trans. Linda Parshall.
het werk van Gerard Ter Borch.” Kostuum tary Men: Masculinity Transformed.” In The
Anraedt... Zwolle, 1899. Berlin, 1975.
(1991), 37 – 41. Public and Private in Dutch Culture of the
Houck 1901 Kemmer 1998 Golden Age. Eds. Arthur K.Wheelock Jr. and
Hoet 1752
Houck, M.E. Gids voor Deventer en Omstreken. Kemmer, Claus. “In Search of Classical Form: Adele Seeff. Newark, Del., 2000, 100 – 122
Hoet, G. Catalogus of naamlijst van
3d ed. Deventer, 1901. Gerard de Lairesse’s Groot schilderboek and (Papers presented at a symposium held at the
schilderijen...zo in Holland als Braband en
Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting.” Center for Renaissance and Baroque Studies,
andere plaatsen in het openbaar verkogt. 3 vols. Ingamells 1992
Simiolus 26 (1998), 87 – 115. University of Maryland, 1993).
The Hague, 1752. Ingamells, John. The Wallace Collection: Cata
Please note errata: the first two illustration
logue of Pictures, IV, Dutch and Flemish. Lon- Kettering 1988
Hollander 2002 captions are reversed.
don, 1992. Kettering, Alison M. Drawings from the Ter
Hollander, Martha. An Entrance for the Eyes:
Borch Studio Estate in the Rijksmuseum. 2 vols. Kolfin 1999
Space and Meaning in Seventeenth-Century Israel 1982
The Hague, 1988. Kolfin, E. “‘Betaamt het de Christen de dans
Dutch Art. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, Israel, Jonathan I. The Dutch Republic and the
te aanschouwen?’ Dansende elite op Noord
2002. Hispanic World, 1606 – 1661. Oxford, 1982. Kettering 1993/1997
nederlandse schilderijen en prenten (circa
Kettering, Alison M. “Ter Borch’s Ladies in
Hollstein 1949 – Israel 1995 1600 – 1645).” In Vermaak van de elite in de
Satin.” Art History 16 (1993), 95 – 124. In Franits
Hollstein, F.W.H. Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Israel, Jonathan I. The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, vroegmoderne tijd. Eds. Jan de Jongste, et al.
1997, 98 – 115, 222 – 228.
Engravings, and Woodcuts, c. 1450 – 1700. 41 + Greatness, and Fall, 1477 – 1806. Oxford and Hilversum, 1999, 153 – 172.
vols. Amsterdam, 1949 – . New York, 1995. Kettering 1995
Kolfin 2002
Kettering, Alison M. “Het Portret van Moses
Honig 1997 Israel 1997 Kolfin, E. “Een geselschap jonge luyden.
ter Borch door Gerard and Gesina ter Borch.”
Honig, Elizabeth. “The Space of Gender in Israel, Jonathan I. “Art and Diplomacy: Gerard Productie, functie en betekenis van Noord-
Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 43 (1995),
Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting.” In Ter Borch and the Münster Peace Negotiations, nederlandse voorsetellingen van vrolijke gezel-
317 – 335.
Franits 1997, 186 – 201. 1646 – 8.” In Conflicts of Empires. London, 1997, schappen 1610 – 1645.” Ph.D. diss., University of
93 – 104. Kettering 1996 Leiden, 2002.
Honig 2001
Kettering, Alison M. “Gerard Ter Borch.” In
Honig, Elizabeth. “Desire and Domestic Econ- Jager 1985 Korthals Altes 2000 – 2001
The Dictionary of Art 4 (1996), 379 – 384.
omy.” The Art Bulletin 83 (2001), 294 – 315. Jager, Maarten. Voorkeuren: een particuliere Korthals Altes, Everhard. “The Eighteenth-
collectie. Utrecht, 1985. Kettering 1997 Century Gentleman Dealer Willem Lormier
Hoogstraten 1678
Kettering, Alison M. “Gentlemen in Satin: and the International Dispersal of Seventeenth-
Hoogstraten, Samuel van. Inleyding tot de De Jongh 1967
Masculine Ideals in Later 17th-Century Dutch Century Dutch Paintings.” Simiolus 28
Hooge Schoole der Schilderkonst: anders de Jongh, E. de. Zinne- en minnebeelden in de
Portraiture.” Art Journal 56 (Summer 1997), (2000 – 2001), 251 – 311.
Zichtbaere Werelt. Rotterdam, 1678. schilderkunst van de zeventiende eeuw.
41 – 47.
Amsterdam, 1967. Kronenburg 1927
Hope 1891
Kettering 1998 Kronenburg, H. “In en om de Deventer
A Catalogue of Pictures of the Dutch and Flem De Jongh 1997
Kettering, Alison M. “Gerard ter Borch’s Magistraat, 1591 – 1795.” In Verslagen en
ish Schools Lent to the South Kensington Jongh, Eddy de. “Realism and Seeming Realism
Swearing of the Oath of Ratification of the Mededeelingen, Vereeniging tot Beoefening
Museum by Lord Francis Pelham Clinton- in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting.” In
Treaty of Munster as Historical Representa- van Overijsselsch Regt en Geschiedenis.
Hope. London, 1891. Franits 1997, 21 – 56.
tion.” In Münster and Osnabrück 1998, 2: Deventer, 1927, 70 – 80.
605 – 614.
Kronig 1914 Levinson-Lessing 1964 Marks 1968 Meusel 1787 – 1791
Kronig, J. O. A Catalogue of the Paintings at Levinson-Lessing, V. F. The Hermitage, Lenin Marks, Arthur S. “David Wilkie’s ‘Letter of Meusel, Johann Georg. Museum für Künstler
Doughty House, Richmond, and Elsewhere in grad: Dutch and Flemish Masters. Leningrad Introduction.’” The Burlington Magazine 110 und für Kunstliebhaber, oder Fortsetzung der
the Collection of Sir Frederick Cook. Bt. 2 vols. and London, 1964. (March 1968), 125 – 133. Miscellaneen artistischen Jubalts. 3 vols.
London, 1914. Mannheim, 1787 – 1791.
Liechtenstein 1931 De Marly 1980
Kruimel 1971 Kronfeld, A. Führer durch die Fürstlich Liech Marly, Diane de. “Dress in Baroque Portraiture: M. H. de Young Memorial Museum 1966
Kruimel, H. L. “Rondom de Van der Schalcke- tensteinsche Gemäldegalerie in Wien. Vienna, The Flight from Fashion.” Antiquaries Journal European Works of Art in the M. H. de Young
portretten van Gerard Ter Borch.” Jaarboek 1931. 60 (1980), 268 – 284. Memorial Museum. Berkeley, 1966.
van het Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie 25
Liedtke 1989 Martin 1908 Moes 1897 – 1905
(1971), 224 – 229.
Liedtke, Walter. “Dutch and Flemish Paintings Martin, W. “Aanwinsten van het Mauritshuis.” Moes, E.W. Iconographia Batavia, berede
Krul 1634 from the Hermitage: Some notes to an exhibi- Bulletin van den Nederlandschen Oudheid neerde lijst van geschilderde en gebeeldhouwde
Krul, Jan. Eerlycke Tytkorting. Haarlem, 1634. tion catalogue with special attention to Rem- kundigen Bond 1, series 2 (1908), 235 – 240. portretten van Noord-Nederlanders in vorige
brandt, Van Dyck and Jordaens.” Oud Holland eeuwen. 2 vols. Amsterdam, 1897.
Ter Kuile 1974 Martin 1913
103 (1989), 154 – 168.
Kuile, O. ter. Catalogus van der Schilderijen: Martin, W. “Gerard Terborch ‘Moederlijke Moes-Veth 1955
Rijksmuseum Twenthe Enschede. Enschede, Liedtke 2000 zorgen.’” Vereeniging Rembrandt, Jaarverslag Moes-Veth, A. J. “Mozes ter Borch als sujet
1974. Liedtke, Walter. A View of Delft: Vermeer and over 1913, 10 – 11. van zijn broer Gerard.” Bulletin van het Rijks
His Contemporaries. Zwolle, 2000. museum 3 (1955), 37 – 46.
Kultzen 1996 Martin 1914
Kultzen, Rolf. Michael Sweerts: Brussels 1618 – Liedtke forthcoming Martin, W. “’s Rijks aanwinsten uit de verza- Moiso-Diekamp 1987
Goa 1664. Ed. and trans. Diane L. Webb. Doorn Liedtke, Walter. Catalogue of Dutch Paintings meling Steengracht.” Bulletin van den Neder Moiso-Diekamp, Cornelia. Das Pendant in der
spijk, 1996. in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. landschen Oudheidkundigen Bond 7 (1914): holländischen Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts.
8 – 18. Frankfurt, Bern, New York, and Paris, 1987.
Kunzle 2002 Livret 1838
Kunzle, David. From Criminal to Courtie: The Livret de la Galerie Impériale de l’Ermitage de Martin 1935 Montias 1989
Soldier in Netherlandish Art 1550 – 1672. Leiden Saint-Pétersbourg. Saint Petersburg, 1838. Martin, W. Musée Royal de la Haye: Catalogue Montias, John Michael. Vermeer and His
and Boston, 2002. Raisonné des Tableaux et Sculptures. The Milieu: A Web of Social History. Princeton,
Lugt 1938 – 1964
Hague, 1935. 1989.
Kuznetsov and Linnik 1982 Lugt, Frits. Répertoire des catalogues de ventes
Kuznetsov, Y., and I. Linnik. Dutch Paintings in publiques, intéressant l’art ou la curiosité.... Martin 1951 Moonen 1700
Soviet Museums. New York and Leningrad, The Hague, 1938 – 1964. Martin, W. Dutch Painting of the Great Period, Moonen, Arnold. A. Moonens Poëzy. Amster-
1982. 1650 – 1697. London, 1951. dam and Utrecht, 1700.
MacLaren 1960
Laing 1996 MacLaren, Neil. The National Gallery Cata Mauritshuis 1935 Naumann 1981
Laing, Alastair. “The National Trust, Historic logues: The Dutch School. London, 1960. Musée Royal de la Haye: Catalogue Raisonné Nauman, Otto. Frans van Mieris the Elder
Houses and Collections.” Apollo 143 (April des Tableaux et Sculptures. The Hague, 1935. (1635 – 1681). Doornspijk, 1981.
MacLaren and Brown 1991
1996), 8 – 10.
MacLaren, Neil. The Dutch School, 1600 – 1900. Mauritshuis 1977 Near 1985
De Lairesse 1707 Revised and expanded by Christopher Brown. The Royal Cabinet of Paintings: Illustrated Gen Near, Pinckney. “European Paintings and
Lairesse, Gerard de. Groot Schilderboek. 2 vols. London, 1991. eral Catalogue. The Hague, 1977. Drawings: The Williams Collection and Fund.”
Amsterdam, 1707. Apollo 122 (December 1985): 440 – 451.
Manchester City Art Gallery 1980 Mauritshuis 1985
De Lairesse/Fritsch 1738 Concise Catalogue of Foreign Paintings. Man- Hoetink, H. R., Nicolette Sluijter-Seiffert, Nevitt 2003
Lairesse, Gerard de. The Art of Painting. Trans. chester, 1980. et al. The Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis. Nevitt, H. Rodney Jr. Art and the Culture of
John Frederick Fritsch. London, 1738. Amsterdam and New York, 1985. Love in Seventeenth-Century Holland. Cam-
Van Mander 1604
bridge, 2003.
Lammertse 1998 Mander, Karel van. Het Schilder-boeck. Haar- Mayer 1930
Lammertse, Friso. Dutch Genre Paintings of lem, 1604. Mayer, August L. “Die Sammlung Philip Nicolle 1908
the 17th Century: Collection of the Museum Lehman.” Pantheon 5 (1930): 111 – 118. Nicolle, Marcel. “La Collection Rodolphe
Van Mander 1994
Boijmans Van Beuningen. Rotterdam, 1998. Kann.” La Revue de l’Art 23 (1908), 187 – 204.
Mander, Karel van. The Lives of the Illustrious Merling 2002
Lehman 1928 Netherlandish and German Painters from the Merling, Mitchell. John and Mable Ringling Van Nierop 1993
Lehman, Robert. The Philip Lehman Collection First Edition of the Schilder-boeck (1603 – 1604). Museum of Art. Sarasota, Fla., 2002. Nierop, H. van. The Nobility of Holland.
New York. 2 vols. Paris, 1928. Ed. and trans., with introduction by H. Mie- Cambridge, 1993.
dema. Doornspijk, 1994.
218
Northwick 1858 Rishel 1974 Sedelmeyer Gallery 1901 Stiglic 1998
A Catalogue of the Pictures, Works of Art, etc. Rishel, Joseph J. “Dutch Painting: An Over- Illustrated Catalogue of the Seventh Series of Stiglic, Anja. Machtpräsentation und-
at Northwick Park. London, 1858. looked Aspect of the Collection.” Apollo 100 100 Paintings by Old Masters. Paris, 1901. demonstration: Die Funktion der öffentlichen
(July 1974), 28 – 33. Feierlichkeiten auf dem Münsterschen
Overijsselsche Almanak 1848 Slive 1995
Friedenskongress. Münster, 1998.
“Het Schilderstuk boven de deur in de Robinson 1974 Slive, Seymour. Dutch Painting 1600 – 1800.
Raadkamer op het Stadhuis te Deventer.” Robinson, Franklin W. Gabriel Metsu New Haven, 1995. Stone-Ferrier 1985
Overijsselsche Almanak voor oudheden en (1629 – 1667): A Study of His Place in Dutch Stone-Ferrier, Linda. Images of Textiles, the
Sluijter 1991/1997
letteren (1848), 250 – 260. Genre Painting of the Golden Age. New York, Weave of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art and
Sluijter, Eric Jan. “Didactic and Disguised
1974. Society. Ann Arbor, 1985.
Parthey 1863 – 1864 Meanings? Several Seventeenth-Century Texts
Parthey, Gustav. Deutscher Bildersaal: Roodenburg 1991 on Painting and the Iconological Approach to Strouse 2000
Verzeichniss der in Deutschland vorhandenen Roodenburg, Herman. “The ‘Hand of Friend- Dutch Paintings of this Period.” In Art in His Strouse, Jean. Morgan: American Financier.
Ölbilder verstorbene Maler aller Schulen. ship’: Shaking Hands and Other Gestures in tory, History in Art; Studies in Seventeenth- New York, 2000.
2 vols. Berlin, 1863 – 1864. the Dutch Republic.” In Bremmer and Rooden- Century Dutch Culture. Eds. D. Freedberg and
Sumowski 1983 – 1994
burg 1991, 152 – 189. J. de Vries. Santa Monica, 1991, 175 – 207.
Pauw-De Veen 1969 Sumowski, W. Gemälde der Rembrandt-
Reprinted in Franits 1997, 78 – 87, 211 – 218.
Pauw-De Veen, Lydia. De begrippen “schilder,” Roodenburg 1995 Schüler. 6 vols. Landau, 1983 – 1994.
“schilderij,” en “schilderen” in de zeventiende Roodenburg, Herman. “‘Welstand’ en ‘Wel Sluijter 2000
Sutton 1986
eeuw. Brussels, 1969. levendheid.’” Nederland Kunsthistorisch Jaar Sluijter, Eric Jan. Seductress of Sight: Studies in
Sutton, Peter C. A Guide to Dutch Art in Amer
boek 46 (1995), 416 – 436. Dutch Art of the Golden Age. Zwolle, 2000.
Philadelphia Museum of Art 1994 ica. Washington, 1986.
Paintings from Europe and the Americas in the Rosen and Zerner 1984 Smith 1829 – 1842
Sutton 1987
Philadelphia Museum of Art: A Concise Cata Rosen, Charles, and Henri Zerner. Roman Smith, John A. A Catalogue Raisonné of the
Sutton, Peter C. “The Noblest of Livestock.”
logue. Philadelphia, 1994. ticism and Realism, The Mythology of Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish, and
In J. Paul Getty The Museum Journal 15 (1987),
Nineteenth-Century Art. New York, 1984. French Painters. 9 vols. and supplement. Lon-
Plietzsch 1944 97 – 110.
don, 1829 – 1842.
Plietzsch, Eduard. Gerard Ter Borch. Vienna, Rosenberg 1897
Sutton 1990
1944. Rosenberg, Adolf. Terborch und Jan Steen. Smith 1987
Sutton, Peter C. Northern European Paintings
Bielefeld, 1897. Smith, David R. “Irony and Civility: Notes on
Plietzsch 1961 in the Philadelphia Museum of Art, from the
the Convergence of Genre and Portraiture in
Plietzsch, Eduard. Review of Gerard Ter Borch, Rosenberg, Slive, and Ter Kuile 1966 Sixteenth through the Nineteenth Century.
Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting.” The Art
by Sturla J. Gudlaugsson. Kunstchronik 14 Rosenberg, Jacob, Seymour Slive, and E. H. ter Philadelphia, 1990.
Bulletin 69 (1987), 407 – 430.
(1961), 132 – 141. Kuile. Dutch Art and Architecture: 1600 to 1800.
Sutton 1997
Baltimore, 1966. Rev. ed., 1972. Snoep-Reitsma 1973
Polesden Lacey 1953 Sutton, Peter C. Gerard Ter Borch: “Woman
Snoep-Reitsma, Ella. “De Waterzuchtige Vrouw
Polesden Lacey. A Property of the National Schama 1987 Sealing a Letter” [cat., Otto Naumann, Ltd.]
van Gerard Dou en de betekenis van de lam-
Trust. London, 1953. Schama, Simon. The Embarrassment of Riches: (New York, 1997).
petkan.” In Album Amicorum J. G. van Gelder.
An Interpretation of Dutch Culture in the
Polesden Lacey 1964 Eds. J. Bruyn, J. A. Emmens, E. de Jongh, and Sutton 2002
Golden Age. New York, 1987.
St. John Gore, F. Polesden Lacey. London, 1964. D. P. Snoep. The Hague, 1973, 285 – 292. Sutton, Peter C. Dutch and Flemish Paintings:
Rev. ed., 1976. Schipper-van Lottum 1975 The Collection of Willem Baron van Dedem.
Somof 1895
Schipper-van Lottum, M. G. A. “Een naimant- London, 2002.
Pommersfelden 1857 Somof, Andrei. Ermitage Impérial: Catalogue
gen met een naijcussen,” Antiek 10 (1975),
Katalog der Gräflich von Schönborn’schen de la Galerie des Tableaux. 2 vols. 3d. ed. Saint Sutton 2003
137 – 163.
Bilder-Gallerie zu Pommersfelden. Würzburg, Petersburg, 1895. Sutton, Peter C. “Love Letters: Dutch Genre
1857. Scott 1987 Paintings in the Age of Vermeer.” In Dublin
Staatliche Museum, Berlin 1911
Scott, Mary Ann. Dutch, Flemish, and German and Greenwich, Conn., 2003 – 2004, 14 – 49.
Renger 1986 Führer durch die Königlichen Museen zu Berlin.
Paintings in the Cincinnati Art Museum, Fif
Renger, Konrad. Adriaen Brouwer und das Berlin, 1911. Terwesten 1770
teenth through Eighteenth Centuries. Cincin-
niederländische Bauerngenre 1600 – 1660. Terwesten, Pieter. Catalogus ofte Naamlyst van
nati, 1987. Staatliche Museen, Berlin 1978
Munich, 1986. Schilderyen, met derselver prysen zedert den 22.
Picture Gallery Staatliche Museen Preussischer
Sedelmeyer Gallery 1898 Augusti 1752 tot den 21 November 1768. The
Rietstap 1954 Kulturbesitz Berlin: Catalogue of Paintings
Illustrated Catalogue of 300 Paintings by Old Hague, 1770.
Rietstap, Johannes Baptist. Armorial général 13th – 18th Century. Trans. Linda B. Parshall. 2d
Masters of the Dutch, Flemish, Italian, French,
illustré. 6 vols. 3d. ed. by Victor and Henri rev. ed., Berlin, 1978.
and English Schools. Paris, 1898.
Rolland. Lyon, 1954.
Van Thiel 1976 Van der Veen 2001 De Vries 1994 Wetzlar 1952
Thiel, Pieter van, et al. All the Paintings of the Veen, Jaap van der. “Eenvoudig en stil: Stu- Vries, Dirk J. de. “Het architectonisch decor Collection Dr. H. Wetzlar, Amsterdam. With a
Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. Amsterdam and deerkamers in zeventiende-eeuwse woningen, van Ter Borchs Slijpersfamilie.” In Bouwen en preface by M. J. Friedländer. Amsterdam, 1952.
Maarssen, 1976. voornamelijk te Amsterdam, Deventer en Duiden, Studies over Architectuur en Iconolo
Wheelock 1995
Leiden.” Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek gie. Eds. E. den Hartog, et al. Alphen aan den
Van Thiel and De Bruyn Kops 1995 Wheelock Jr., Arthur K. Dutch Paintings of the
2000, 51 (2001), 137 – 172. Rijn, 1994, 181 – 194.
Thiel, P. J. van, and C. J. de Bruyn Kops. Fram Seventeenth Century. The Collections of the
ing in the Golden Age: Picture and Frame in Verbeek 1955 Waagen 1854 National Gallery of Art Systematic Catalogue.
Seventeenth-Century Holland. Trans. Andrew Verbeek, J. “Johannes van Cuylenburch en zijn Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Treasures of Art in Washington and New York, 1995.
P. McCormick. Zwolle, 1995. vader Gerrit Lambertsz.” Oud Holland 70 Great Britain. 3 vols. London, 1854.
White 1959
(1955), 67 – 81.
Thirlestane House 1846 Waagen 1864 White, Christopher. “Dutch and Flemish
Hours in the Picture Gallery of Thirlestane Vergara 1998 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Die Gemäldesamm Paintings at Waddesdon Manor.” Gazette des
House. Cheltenham, 1846. Vergara, Lisa. “Antiek and Modern in Ver- lung in der Kaiserlichen Ermitage zu St. Peters Beaux-Arts 54 (July-August 1959), 67 – 74.
meer’s Lady Writing a Letter with Her Maid.” burg nebst Bemerkungen über andere dortige
Toledo Museum of Art 1976 Wieseman 2002
In Vermeer Studies. Studies in the History of Kunstsammlungen. Munich, 1864.
Wittman, Otto, et al. The Toledo Museum of Wieseman, Marjorie E. Caspar Netscher and
Art, vol. 55, eds. Ivan Gaskell and Michiel
Art: European Paintings. Toledo, 1976. Waterhouse 1967 Late Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting.
Jonker. National Gallery of Art, Washington,
Waterhouse, Ellis. The James de Rothschild Doornspijk, 2002.
Trnek 1992 1998, 235 – 253.
Collection at Waddesdon Manor: Paintings.
Trnek, Renate. Die Holländischen Gemälde des De Winkel 1995
Vergara 2003 Fribourg, 1967.
17. Jahrhunderts in der Gemäldegalerie der Winkel, Marieke de. “Eene der deftigsten drag-
Vergara, Lisa. “Women, Letters, Artistic
Academie der bildenden Künste in Wien. Webber 1980 ten.” In Nederland Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 46
Beauty: Vermeer’s Theme and Variations.” In
Vienna, 1992. Sandra L. Webber. “A Technical Study of Two (1995), 144 – 167.
Dublin and Greenwich, Conn., 2003 – 2004,
Portraits by Gerard Ter Borch.” In Papers
Trnek 1997 50 – 62. De Winkel 1998
presented at the Art Conservation Training
Trnek, Renate. Die Gemäldegalerie der Aca Winkel, Marieke de. “The Interpretation of
Villars 1902 Programs Conference. Winterthur, 1980,
demie der bildenden Künste in Wien. Vienna, Dress in Vermeer’s Paintings.” In Vermeer
Villars, Paul. “La Collection de M. Alfred de 163 – 180.
1997. Studies. Studies in the History of Art, vol. 55,
Rothschild.” Les Arts 1 (March 1902), 15 – 23.
Weigel 1977 eds. Ivan Gaskell and Michiel Jonker. National
Vaillat 1912
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts 1966 Weigel, Christoph. Abbildung der gemein- Gallery of Art, Washington, 1998, 327 – 340.
Vaillat, L. “La peinture hollandaise.” L’art et les
European Art in the Virginia Museum of Fine nützlichen Haupt-Stände. Dortmund, 1977.
artistes 15 (April-September), 193 – 208. Wurzbach 1906 – 1911
Arts: A Catalogue. Richmond, 1966.
Westers 1961 Wurzbach, Alfred von. Niederländisches
Valentiner 1929
Vrangel 1909 Westers, A. “Een lampetkan van Delfts Künstler-Lexikon. 3 vols. Vienna, 1906 – 1911.
Valentiner, Wilhelm R. “Portrait of a Man
Vrangel, Nikolai Nikolaevich. Les chefs-d’œuvre aardewerk.” Bulletin Museum Boymans-van
Reading by Gerard Terborch.” Bulletin of The Ydema 1991
de la galerie de tableaux de l’Ermitage impérial Beuningen 12 (1961), 89 – 96.
Detroit Institute of Arts of the City of Detroit 11 Ydema, Onno. Carpets and Their Datings in
à St.-Pétersbourg. London and New York, 1909.
(1929), 2 – 3, no. 1. Van de Wetering 1993 Netherlandish Paintings, 1540 – 1700. Zutphen,
Wetering, Ernst van de. “Het satijn van Gerard 1991.
Valentiner 1930
Ter Borch.” In Kunstschrift 37 (1993), no. 6,
Valentiner, Wilhelm R., ed. Unbekannte Zimmerman and Brown 1974
28 – 37.
Meisterwerke in öffentlichen und privaten Zimmerman, Betty L., and Christopher Brown.
Sammlungen. Berlin, 1930. “Letters to the Editor.” The Burlington Maga
zine 116 (October 1974), 623 – 624.
220
Exhibitions Aberystwyth, Cardiff, and Swansea 1958 Amsterdam 1999 Bern 1943
Dutch Genre Painting. Arts Council of Wales. Still Lifes: Techniques and Style. Rijksmuseum Holländische und Vlämische Meister des 16.
(catalogue edited by Arie Wallert). und 17. Jahrhunderts. Kunstmuseum Bern.
Akron 1956
Dutch Seventeenth Century Paintings and Amsterdam 2000 Birmingham 1950
Drawings. Akron Art Institute. The Glory of the Golden Age: Painting, Sculp Some Dutch Cabinet Pictures of the 17th Cen
ture and Decorative Art. Rijksmuseum (cata- tury. City Art Gallery.
Amsterdam 1900
logue by Judikje Kiers and Fieke Tissink).
Catalogus der verzameling schilderijen en Birmingham 1989
familieportretten van de Heeren Jhr. P. H. Six Amsterdam, Hartford, and San Francisco 2002 Dutch Painting in the Seventeenth Century:
van Vromade, Jhr. Dr. J. Six en Jhr. W. Six. Michael Sweerts (1618 – 1664). Rijksmuseum, Images of a Golden Age in British Collections.
Stedelijk Museum. Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art, and City Art Gallery (catalogue by Christopher
The Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (cata- Wright).
Amsterdam 1913
logue by Guido Jansen and Peter C. Sutton).
Tentoonstelling van een zevental schilderijen, Boston 1970
afkomstig uit de verzameling Steengracht. Antwerp 1991 Masterpieces of Painting in The Metropolitan
Stedelijk Museum. David Teniers the Younger: Paintings, Draw Museum of Art. Museum of Fine Arts.
ings. Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten
Amsterdam 1929 Brussels 1977 – 1978
(catalogue by Margret Klinge).
Tentoonstelling van Oude Kunst door de Ver Personnages et Paysages dans la Peinture Hol
eeniging van Handelaren in Oude Kunst in Apeldoorn 2002 landaise du XVIIième Siecle. Musées Royaux
Nederland. Rijksmuseum. Vorstelijk vee: Vier eeuwen nederlandse vee des Beaux-Arts de Belgique (catalogue by
rassen. Paleis Het Loo (catalogue edited by Renate Trnek).
Amsterdam 1952
Wies Erkelens, Maarten Frankenhuis, and René
Drie Eeuwen Portret in Nederland, 1500 – 1800. Brussels and Antwerp 1946
Zanderink).
Rijksmuseum (catalogue by Adolph Staring). De Hollandsche schilderkunst van Jeroen Bosch
Athens 1992 tot Rembrandt. Palais de Beaux-Arts and
Amsterdam 1976
From El Greco to Cézanne: Masterpieces of Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten.
Tot Lering en Vermaak. Rijksmuseum (cata-
European Painting from the National Gallery
logue by Eddy de Jongh). Buffalo 1942
of Art, Washington and the Metropolitan
Souvenir of a Small Exhibition of European
Amsterdam 1981 Museum of Art, New York. National Gallery
Paintings of the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, Seven
Jan van Goyen 1596 – 1656: Conquest of Space. Alexandros Soutzos Museum.
teenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Albright
Paintings from Museums and Private Collec
Atlanta 1985 Knox Art Gallery.
tions. Waterman Gallery.
Masterpieces of the Golden Age. High Museum
Chicago 1934
Amsterdam 1984 of Art (catalogue by Frits J. Duparc).
Catalogue of a Century of Progress Exhibition
Prijst de Lijst, De Hollandse schilderijlijst in
Basel 1945 of Paintings and Sculpture. Art Institute of
de zeventiende eeuw. Rijksmuseum (catalogue
Meisterwerke Holländischer Malerei des 16. Chicago.
edited by P. J. J. van Thiel and C. J. de Bruijn
und 17. Jahrhunderts. Kunstmuseum Basel.
Kops; English ed. Framing in the Golden Age, Cincinnati 1959
translated by Andrew P. McCormick, Zwolle, Basel 1987 The Lehman Collection, New York. Cincinnati
1995). Im Lichte Hollands: Höllandische Malerei des Art Museum (catalogue by Gustave von Grosch
17. Jahrhunderts aus den Sammlungen des witz).
Amsterdam 1993
Fürsten von Liechtenstein und aus Schweizer
Nederlandse tekenaars geboren tussen 1600 en Cleveland 1936
Besitz. Kunstmuseum Basel (catalogue by Petra
1660. Oude tekeningen van het Amsterdams Catalogue of the Twentieth Anniversary Exhibi
ten Doesschate Chu).
Historisch Museum, waaronder de collectie tion of the Cleveland Museum of Art. Cleveland
Fodor. Amsterdam Historisch Museum Berlin 1929 Museum of Art.
(catalogue by Ben Broos and Marijn Schapel- Die Meister des Holländischen Interieurs.
Cleveland 1973a
houman). Gallery Dr. H. Schäffer.
Dutch Art and Life in the Seventeenth Century.
Amsterdam 1997 Berlin 1931 Cleveland Museum of Art.
Mirror of Everyday Life: Genreprints in the Beschreibendes verzeichnis der Gemälde im
Cleveland 1973b
Netherlands 1550 – 1700. Rijksmuseum (cata- Kaiser-Friedrich-Museum und Deutschen
Masters of Seven Centuries. Cleveland Museum
logue by Eddy de Jongh and Ger Luijten, Museum. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin.
of Art.
translated by Michael Hoyle).
221
Cologne 1991 – 1992 Dublin and Greenwich, Conn., 2003 – 2004 The Hague 1890 Leiden 1996 – 1997
I Bamboccianti: Niederländische Malerrebel Love Letters: Dutch Paintings of Letter Themes Oude Meesters. Mauritshuis. Jan van Goyen. Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal
len im Rom des Barock. Wallraf-Richartz- in the Age of Vermeer. National Gallery of (catalogue by Christiaan Vogelaar, et al.).
The Hague 1903
Museum (catalogue edited by David A. Levine Ireland and The Bruce Museum of Arts and
Catalogus van de Tentoonstelling van Oude London 1819
and Ekkehard Mai). Science (catalogue by Peter C. Sutton, et al.).
Portretten. Haagsche Kunstkring. Catalogue of the Pictures of the Italian, Spanish,
Colorado Springs 1951 – 1952 Edinburgh 1992 Dutch, Flemish, German, French, and British
The Hague 1924
Paintings and Bronzes from the Collection of Dutch Art and Scotland: A Reflection of Taste. Schools. British Institution.
Kinderafbeeldingen. Nederlandsche Schil
Mr. Robert Lehman. Fine Arts Center. National Gallery of Scotland (catalogue by
derkunst XVIe – X Xe eeuw. Gemeentemuseum. London 1844
Julia Lloyd Williams).
Columbus 1950 British Institution for Promoting the Fine Arts
The Hague 1966
Masterpieces of Painting: Treasures of Five Cen Essen 1965 in the United Kingdom. British Institution.
Herdenkingstentoonstelling in het Mauritshuis.
turies. Columbus Gallery of Fine Arts. Gemäldesämmlung der Familie Krupp. Villa
Mauritshuis. London 1871
Hügel.
Columbus 1956 Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters, Associ
The Hague 1998
International Masterpieces. Columbus Gallery Fort Worth 1991 – 1992 ated with Works of Deceased Masters of the
Gerard ter Borch and the Treaty of Münster.
of Fine Arts. Mantegna to Matisse: Selected Treasures of the British School. Royal Academy of Arts.
Mauritshuis (catalogue by Alison M. Ketter-
Cincinnati Art Museum. Kimbell Art Museum.
Copenhagen and Amsterdam 2001 ing). London 1877
Two Golden Ages, Masterpieces of Dutch and Frankfurt 1993 – 1994 Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters, Associ
The Hague and Antwerp 1994
Danish Painting. Statens Museum for Kunst Leselust: Niederländische Malerei von Rem ated with Works of Deceased Masters of the
The Hoogsteder Exhibition of Music and Paint
and Rijksmuseum (catalogue by L. Bøgh Roen- brandt bis Vermeer. Schirn Kunsthalle Frank- British School. Royal Academy of Arts.
ing in the Golden Age. Hoogsteder & Hoog
berg, et al.). furt (catalogue edited by Sabine Schulze).
steder and Hessenhuis Museum (catalogue London 1878
Delft 1948 Goudstikker Gallery 1930 by Edwin Buijsen, Louis Peter Grijp, et al.). Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters, Associ
De Vrede van Münster. Museum Het Prinsenhof. Nouvelles acquisitions de la collection Goudstik ated with Works of Deceased Masters of the
The Hague and Münster 1974
ker. Goudstikker Gallery. British School. Royal Academy of Arts.
Delft and Antwerp 1964 – 1965 Gerard ter Borch: Zwolle 1617 – Deventer 1681.
De Schilder in zijn wereld: Van Jan van Eyck tot Grand Rapids 1949 Mauritshuis and Landesmuseum für Kunst London 1885
van Gogh en Ensor. Stedelijk Museum “Het Old Masters from Midwest Museums. Grand und Kulturgeschichte. Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters, Associ
Prinsenhof” and Koninklijk Museum voor Rapids Art Gallery. ated with Works of Deceased Masters of the
The Hague and San Francisco 1990 – 1991
Schone Kunsten. British School. Royal Academy of Arts.
Grand Rapids 1999 Great Dutch Paintings from America. Maurits
Denver and Newark 2001 – 2002 A Moral Compass: Seventeenth and Eighteenth huis and The Fine Arts Museums of San Fran- London 1890
Art & Home: Dutch Interiors in the Age of Rem Century Painting in the Netherlands. Grand cisco (catalogue by Ben Broos, et al.). Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters, Associ
brandt. Denver Art Museum and The Newark Rapids Art Museum (catalogue by Arthur K. ated with Works of Deceased Masters of the
Hartford 1950 – 1951
Museum (catalogue by Mariët Westermann, Wheelock Jr., et al.). British School. Royal Academy of Arts.
Life in Seventeenth Century Holland: Views,
et al.).
Haarlem 1986 Vistas, Pastimes, Pantomimes, Portraits, Peep London 1894
Detroit 1925 Portretten van echt en trouw: Huwelijk en gezin Shows. Wadsworth Atheneum. Pictures. Corporation of London Art Gallery.
Loan Exhibition of Dutch Paintings of the Sev in de Nederlandse kunst van de zeventiende
Helsinki 1995 London 1895
enteenth Century. The Detroit Institute of Arts. eeuw. Frans Halsmuseum (catalogue by Eddy
The Ter Borchs Meet Again. Synebychoff Art Catalogue of the Loan Collection of Pictures.
de Jongh).
Detroit 1929 Museum, Finnish National Gallery (catalogue Guildhall.
Loan Exhibition of Dutch Genre and Land Haarlem and Antwerp 2000 – 2001 by Marja Supinen).
London 1902
scape Painting. The Detroit Institute of Arts. Pride and Joy: Children’s Portraits in The Neth
Kansas City 1967 – 1968 Exhibition of Works of the Old Masters and
erlands 1500 – 1700. Frans Halsmuseum and
Deventer 1901 Paintings of 17th Century Dutch Interiors. Nel- Deceased Masters of the British School. Royal
Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten
Tentoonstelling van oude kunst en kunstnijver son Gallery of Art and The Atkins Museum. Academy of Arts.
(catalogue edited by Rudi Ekkart and Jan Bap-
heid te houden te Deventer van 12 juni tot 1 juli
tist Bedaux). Kingston upon Hull 1961 London 1913 – 1914
in het gebouw “De Hereeniging.” Deventer.
Dutch Painting of the 17th Century. Ferens Art Woman and Child in Art. Grosvenor Gallery.
Haarlem and Worcester 1993
Dordrecht and Leeuwarden 1988 Gallery.
Judith Leyster: A Dutch Master and Her World. London 1922
Meesterlijk vee: nederlandse veeschilders
Frans Halsmuseum and Worcester Art Leiden 1988 Loan Exhibition of Pictures by Old Masters on
1600 – 1900. Dordrechts Museum and Fries
Museum (catalogue by Pieter Biesboer, James Leidse fijnschilders. Stedelijk Museum de Behalf of Lord Haig’s Appeal for Ex-Service
Museum (catalogue edited by C. Boschma).
Welu, et al.). Lakenhal (catalogue by Eric Jan Sluijter, et al.). Men. Thos. Agnew & Sons.
222
London 1929 Lucern 1948 New York 1942 New York, Toledo, and Toronto 1954 – 1955
Dutch Art. Royal Academy of Arts. Meisterwerke aus den Sammlungen des Fürsten Paintings by the Great Dutch Masters of the Dutch Painting, the Golden Age: An Exhibition
von Liechtenstein. Kunstmuseum. Seventeenth Century: Loan Exhibition in Aid of of Dutch Pictures of the Seventeenth Century.
London 1938
the Queen Wilhelmina Fund and the American The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Toledo
Exhibition of 17th Century Art in Europe. Royal Madrid 2003
Women’s Voluntary Services. Duveen Galleries Museum of Art, and Art Gallery of Ontario.
Academy of Arts. Vermeer y el interior holandés. Museo Nacional
(catalogue by George Henry McCall, et al.).
del Prado (catalogue by Alejandro Vergara and Oberlin 2000
London 1945
Mariët Westermann). New York 1943 Symbol and Meaning in Seventeenth-Century
Dutch Paintings of the 17th Century. Arts
The Bache Collection. The Metropolitan Dutch Art. Allen Memorial Art Museum.
Council. Minneapolis 1952
Museum of Art.
Great Portraits by Famous Painters. Minne- Osaka 1970
London 1952 – 1953
apolis Institute of Arts. New York 1945 Japan World Exposition. Osaka.
Dutch Pictures. Royal Academy of Arts.
Dutch Masters of the 17th Century. Knoedler
Montreal 1944 Osaka 2000
London 1958 Galleries.
Five Centuries of Dutch Art/Cinq siècles d’art The Public and the Private in the Age of Ver
The Robinson Collection. Royal Academy of
hollandaise. Museum of Fine Arts. New York 1954 meer. Osaka Municipal Museum of Art (cata-
Arts.
Loan of Artworks by Robert Lehman to the logue by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.).
Munich 1998
London 1965 Metropolitan Museum of Art. The Metropoli-
Die Nacht. Haus der Kunst (catalogue edited by Oslo 1959
The Assheton Bennett Collection. Royal Acad- tan Museum of Art.
Antje Longhi, Stephanie Rosenthal, and Bern- Fra Rembrandt til Vermeer. Nasjonalgalleriet.
emy of Arts (catalogue by Frits Grossmann).
hart Schwenk). New York 1962
Paris 1883
London 1976 Masters of Seven Centuries: Paintings and
Münster and Osnabrück 1998 Exposition de peinture: Cent chefs-d’oeuvre des
Art in Seventeenth-Century Holland. The Drawings from the 14th to 20th Century.
1648, War and Peace in Europe. 3 vols. West- collections Parisiennes. Galerie Georges Petit.
National Gallery (catalogue by Christopher Wildenstein and Company.
fälisches Landesmuseum (catalogue edited by
Brown). Paris 1911
Klaus Bussmann and Heinz Schilling). New York 1970
Exposition des grands et petits maîtres hollan
London 1983a Masterpieces of Fifty Centuries. The Metropoli-
Naarden 1996 dais. Jeu de Paume.
The Neglected National Gallery. The National tan Museum of Art.
De Hollandse Kortegaard. Geschilderede
Gallery. Paris 1951
Wachtlokalen uit de Gouden Eeuw. Nederlands New York 1973
Chefs d’oeuvre des Musées de Berlin. Musée du
London 1983b Vestingmuseum. Dutch Couples: Pair Portraits by Rembrandt
Petit Palais.
Some Masterpieces from Manchester City Art and His Contemporaries. The Metropolitan
Neuss 1986
Gallery. David Carritt Ltd. (catalogue by Julien Museum of Art (catalogue by John Walsh Jr.). Paris 1952
Von Pieter Brueghel bis Gerard Terborch: Nie
Treuherz). Chefs d’oeuvre de la Collection D.G.van Beun
derländische Meister aus eigenem Bestand und New York 1984
ingen. Musée du Petit Palais.
London 1995 rheinischem Besitz. Clemens Sels Museum Masterpieces from the Manchester City Art
In Trust for the Nation, Paintings from (catalogue by M. Tauch and G. Broens). Gallery. Noortman and Brod. Paris 1957
National Trust Houses (catalogue by Alastair La Collection Lehman de New York. Musée
New Haven 1960 New York 1991
Laing). de l’Orangerie (catalogue by Charles Sterling,
Paintings, Drawings, and Sculpture Collected Dutch and Flemish Paintings and Drawings
et al.).
London 1999 by Yale Alumni. Yale University Art Gallery. 1525 – 1925. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
The Cabinet Picture: Dutch and Flemish Mas Paris 1986
New York 1912 New York and Chicago 1988
ters of the Seventeenth Century. Richard Green De Rembrandt à Vermeer: Les peintures hollan
Loan Exhibition of Old Masters for the Benefit Dutch and Flemish Paintings from the Hermi
(catalogue by Christopher Wright). dais au Mauritshuis de La Haye. Grand Palais
of the Artists’ Fund and Artists’ Aid Societies. tage. The Metropolitan Museum of Art and
(catalogue by Ben Broos, et al.).
London and Hartford 1998 M. Knoedler and Co. The Art Institute of Chicago.
Pieter de Hooch, 1629 – 1684. Dulwich Picture Philadelphia, Berlin, and London 1984
New York 1915 New York and London 2001
Gallery and Wadsworth Atheneum (catalogue Masters of Seventeenth-Century Dutch
Loan Exhibition of Masterpieces by Old and Vermeer and the Delft School. The Metropoli-
by Peter C. Sutton). Genre Painting. Philadelphia Museum of Art,
Modern Painters. M. Knoedler and Co. tan Museum of Art and The National Gallery
Gemäldegalerie, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin,
Los Angeles 1933 (catalogue by Walter Liedtke, Michiel C. Plomp,
New York 1939 and Royal Academy of Arts (catalogue by Peter
Five Centuries of European Painting. Los Ange- Axel Rüger, et al.).
Masterpieces of Art: European Paintings and C. Sutton, et al.).
les Museum.
Sculpture from 1300 – 1800. New York World’s
Fair (catalogue by Wilhelm R. Valentiner).
223 e x h i b i t i o n s
Phoenix 1998 Rotterdam 1938 Sarasota 1981 – 1982 Washington and Athens 1992 – 1993
Copper as Canvas: Two Centuries of Master Meesterwerken uit vier eeuwen, 1400 – 1800. Dutch Seventeenth Century Portraiture, the From El Greco to Cézanne. National Gallery of
piece Paintings on Copper 1575 – 1775. Phoenix Museum Boymans. Golden Age. The John and Mable Ringling Art and Soutzos Museum.
Art Museum, Nelson-Atkins Museum of Museum of Art (catalogue by William H.
Rotterdam 1947 Washington and Cincinnati 1988 – 1989
Art, and The Royal Cabinet of Paintings Wilson).
Kinderportrette. Museum Boymans. Masterworks from Munich: Sixteenth- to Eigh
Mauritshuis.
Stockholm 1966 teenth-Century Paintings from the Alte Pina
Rotterdam 1950 – 1951
Pittsburgh 1954 Christina, Queen of Sweden — A Personality of kothek. National Gallery of Art and Cincinnati
Drie en zestig schilderijen uit de verzameling
Pictures of Everyday Life: Genre Painting in European Civilisation. Nationalmuseum. Art Museum (catalogue by Beverly Louise
Willem van der Vorm. Museum Boymans.
Europe, 1500 – 1900. Carnegie Institute (intro- Brown and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.).
Tokyo and Kyoto 1968 – 1969
duction by Gordon Bailey Washburn). Rotterdam 1955
The Age of Rembrandt, Dutch Paintings and Washington and The Hague 1995 – 1996
Kunstschatten uit Nederlandse verzamelingen.
Providence 1938 Drawings of the Seventeenth Century. The Johannes Vermeer. National Gallery of Art and
Museum Boymans.
Dutch Painting in the Seventeenth Century. National Museum of Western Art and Kyoto Mauritshuis (catalogue by Arthur K. Wheelock
Rhode Island School of Design Museum of Art Rotterdam 1985 Municipal Museum. Jr., Ben Broos, et al.).
(catalogue by Wolfgang Stechow). Meesterwerken uit de Hermitage Leningrad:
Toronto 1936 Washington, London, and Amsterdam 2001
Hollandse en Vlaamse schilderkunst van de
Raleigh 1959 Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Paintings Aelbert Cuyp. National Gallery of Art, National
17e eeuw. Museum Boymans.
Masterpieces of Art. North Carolina Museum by European Masters. Art Gallery of Ontario. Gallery, and Rijksmuseum (catalogue edited by
of Art. Saint Petersburg and Atlanta 1975 Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.).
Utrecht 1998
Dutch Life in the Golden Century. Museum of
Rome 1928 Utrecht and Peace: Negotiations in Münster. Zurich 1953
Fine Arts and High Museum of Art (catalogue
Mostra di Capolavori della Pittura Olandese. Centraal Museum. Höllander des 17. Jahrhunderts. Kunsthaus.
by Franklin W. Robinson).
Galleria Borghese.
Washington 1982 – 1984 Zwolle 1882
San Francisco 1999
Rome 1956 – 1957 Mauritshuis: Dutch Paintings of the Golden Geschiedkundig-Overijsselsche tentoonstelling.
Masterworks of European Painting in the Cali
Il seicento Europeo. Palazzo delle Esposizioni. Age, Royal Picture Gallery, The Hague. Vereeniging tot Beoefening van Overijsselsch
fornia Palace of the Legion of Honor. California
National Gallery of Art. Regt en Geschiedenis at former residence of
Rome and Milan 1954 Palace of the Legion of Honor (catalogue by
Commissaris des Konings and the Provinciale
Mostra di Pittura Olandese del Seicento. Steven A. Nash, Lynn Federle Orr, and Marion Washington 1985 – 1986
Staten.
Palazzo delle Esposizioni and Palazzo Reale. C. Stewart). The Treasure Houses of Britain: Five Hundred
Years of Private Patronage and Art Collecting. Zwolle 1997
Rotterdam 1910 San Francisco, Toledo, and Boston 1966 – 1967
National Gallery of Art (catalogue edited by Zwolle in de Gouden Eeuw, Cultuur en schilder
Catalogus der tentoonstelling van portret The Age of Rembrandt: An Exhibition of Dutch
Gervase Jackson-Stops). kunst. Stedelijk Museum (catalogue by Jean
miniaturen. Rotterdamsche Kunstkring (cata- Paintings of the Seventeenth Century. Califor-
Streng and Lydie van Dijk).
logue edited by C. van Omeren). nia Palace of the Legion of Honor, Toledo Washington and Amsterdam 1996
Museum of Art, and Museum of Fine Arts Jan Steen: Painter and Storyteller. National
(catalogue by Horst Gerson and P. J. J. van Gallery of Art and Rijksmuseum (catalogue by
Thiel). H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, and
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.).
224
Index Page numbers in bold refer to illustrations. Van Brekelenkam, Quiringh, 90 E
Bril, Paul, 3 East India Company, 63
A Brotherhood of the Cross, 50 Eichelberg, Nicolaes, 75
Alexander VII, pope (Fabio Chigi), 68 Brouwer, Adriaen, 10, 78 Encouragement to Drink (Ter Borch), 78
Angel, Philips, 24, 32, 40; Lof der schilder-konst Brun, Antoine, 72 The Entry of Adriaen Pauw into Münster
(In Praise of the Art of Painting), 21, 21 De Brune, Johan, 90 (Ter Borch and Van der Horst), 63, 64
Anonymous, The Swearing of the Oath of Ratifi Bufkens, Anna, 3, 4 Evelyn, John, 50
cation of the Treaty of Münster, 15 May Bürger, W. See Thoré, Theophile
1648, 72 , 74 Buytewech, Willem, 3, 10, 20, 22 F
Van Anraadt, Pieter, 13, 153 Falck, Jeremias, 83
C Farm Buildings and a Hay-Barn outside Zwolle
B Callot, Jacques, 5 (Ter Borch), 108
Van Baburen, Dirck, 149 Cats, Jacob, 11, 90, 94, 105; Silenus Flinck, Govaert, Girl by a High Chair, 77 ;
Bamboccianti, 8, 11, 90 Alcibiadis, sive, Proteus, 80 ; Sinne Portrait of a Man, 100
Bardoel, Jan (portrait by Ter Borch), 58 , 75 en Minnebeelden, 171
Bardoel, Johanna (portrait by Ter Borch), 75 Charles I, king of England, 6 G
Baudelaire, Charles, 20 Chigi, Fabio (Pope Alexander VII), 68 Galen, Christoph Bernhard von, 120
Bentvueghels, 8, 52 Codde, Pieter, 5, 9, 20, 22, 24, 32, 35, 46, Gallant Conversation (known as Paternal
Beurs, Willem, 37 53, 120, 141 Admonition) (cat. 27), 14, 26, 27, 33, 34
Bible, 11; 2 Samuel 11:6, 104; Ecclesiastes, 154; Colonna family, 3 (detail), 35, 37 (detail), 37 – 38, 38 (detail),
Proverbs 31:13 and 19, 94 The Consultation (cat. 2), 1 (detail), 8, 13, 24, 114 – 117, 115 , 117 (detail), 122
Bloteling, Abraham, Tobias Govertsz van den 47 – 49, 48 Le Gallant Militaire (Ter Borch), 25 , 116
Wyngaert (after Van Musscher), 182 Coques, Gonzales, Portrait of a Man Receiving The Game of Backgammon (Ter Borch), 24, 25
Bode, Willem von, 50 a Letter (attributed to), 13 Van Gent, Barthold, 72
De Bonte, Aert, 8, 49 Courbet, Gustave, 20 De Gheyn, Jacques, 87
Ter Borch, Anna, 4, 11 Cupidos lusthof (Cupid’s pleasure garden), 171 A Girl in a Country Costume (Ter Borch), 154
Ter Borch, Gerard, the Elder, 2 – 8, 11, 20 – 21, 32, Curiosity (cat. 35), 26, 27, 36, 137, 138 – 140, 139 Glass of Lemonade (cat. 39), 35, 149 – 153, 150
38, 52, 123, 189; Young People Frolicking in Van Cuylenborch, Johannes, A Smithy in Glass of Lemonade (cat. 40), 35, 149 – 153, 151
the Grass, 3 Zwolle (attributed to), 106 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, Elective
Ter Borch, Gesina, 2, 4, 11 – 12, 13, 16 – 17, 27, 81, Cuyp, Aelbert, 110 Affinities, 114
84, 102, 104, 116, 123, 124, 137, 138, 141, 152, Goltzius, Hendrik, 4, 10, 87; Willem of
154; Gentleman Bowing to Kiss a Lady’s D Orange, 170
Hand, 141; A Gentleman Kneeling before a Daniels, Derck, 14, 159, 162; details of frame of Goya, Francisco de, Procession of
Young Lady, 12 ; Moses on the Beach near The Town Council of Deventer, 162, 164 Flagellants, 52
Harwich, 168 ; Posthumous Portrait of Dankers, K., 34 Van Goyen, Jan (cat. 21), 15, 97 – 99, 98, 99
Moses ter Borch (Ter Borch), 13, 42 – 43 Delfos, Abraham, 96 De Graeff family, 16
(detail), 168 – 170, 169 ; Self-Portrait of Dou, Gerard, 10, 90 Grasdorp, Jan, 106
Gesina in a Gray Cartouche, Crowned with Drebbel, Cornelis, Grammatica (after The Grinder’s Family (cat. 24), 27, 90,
the Ter Borch Arms, 123 Goltzius), 87 105 – 106, 107
Ter Borch, Harmen (grandfather), 4 The Duet (Ter Borch), 172
Ter Borch, Harmen (half brother), 4, 11 Van Duren, Damiaan, 159 H
Ter Borch, Jenneken, 138, 177 Van Duren, Gerryt, 182 Van Haexbergen, Hendrik, 159
Ter Borch, Moses, 4, 11, 87 – 88, 118, 152, 168 , Van Duren, Jan (cat. 42), 158, 159, 160 Van Haexbergen, Margaretha (cat. 43), 159, 161
168 – 170, 169 ; Old Woman before a Mirror, Van Duren, Jan (cat. 52), 16, 182 – 183, 184 Hals, Dirck, 20, 22, 35, 141; Moederzorg
with Two Maidservants, 81 Duyster, Willem, 5, 9, 32, 35, 44, 46, 53, 120; (Mother’s Care), 90
Ter Borch, Sara, 4 The Maurauders, 24 Hals, Frans, 14, 47, 141; Banquet in a Park,
Borghini, Raffaello, 36 Van Dyck, Anthony, 6, 7, 144; The 22, 23
A Boy Caring for His Dog (cat. 28), 11, 118, 119 Iconography, 7 De Heem, Jan Davidsz, 47, 49
Van der Helst, Bartholomeus, 16, 158
225
Hendrik Casimir II, prince of Nassau- De Lairesse, Gerard, 28, 38; Het groot schilder N Portrait of a Young Man (cat. 37), 144, 145
Dietz, 177 boek (The Art of Painting), 21 – 22, 22 Van der Neer, Eglon, 16, 27, 40, 153 A Portrait of a Young Nobleman (after
Van der Hoeye, Rombout, 72 De Langue, Willem, 16 Netscher, Caspar, 13, 35, 40, 47, 49, 122, 123, 128, Ter Borch), 179
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis, 134 Leonardo da Vinci, 40 130, 153; Lady Seated at a Spinning Wheel, Portrait of a Young Woman (cat. 38),
Hogers, Gosewijn, 146 The Letter (Ter Borch), 27, 28 (detail), 138 94, 96 ; Portrait of a Man, Possibly Coen 146 – 148, 147
Holsteyn, Pieter, Anna van Ruytenburgh and Leunink, Catrina (portrait by Ter Borch), 146 raad Ruysch, 177, 179 Posthumous Portrait of Moses ter Borch
Adriaen Pauw (after Ter Borch), 63 , 64 Leyster, Judith, 47 Van Nieulandt, Willem, II, 3 (cat. 46), 13, 42 – 43 (detail), 168 – 170, 169
Van Honthorst, Gerard, 10 The Lute Player and Officer (Ter Borch), 122 Nilant, Eva, 159 Pot, Hendrik Gerritsz, 7, 56; Charles I, 53 – 54;
De Hooch, Pieter, 15, 90, 102 Nilant, Hendrik, 183 Jacob van der Merckt, 54
Hooft, Pieter Cornelisz, Emblemata M Procession with Flagellants (cat. 3), 50 – 52, 51
Amatoria, 135 Maes, Nicolaes, 158; Old Woman Spinning, 94 O Puget de la Serre, Jean, Le Sécretaire à la
Van Hoogstraten, Samuel, 32 A Maid Milking a Cow in a Barn (cat. 25), 27, Officer Dictating a Letter While a Trumpeter Mode, 132
Horse and Rider (cat. 1), 24, 44 – 46, 45 108 – 111, 109 , 111 (detail), 112 Waits (cat. 31), 26, 126 – 128, 127, 129, 130
Horsemen in front of an Inn (cat. 7), 9, Man Adjusting the Saddle of a Horse Officer Writing a Letter (cat. 32), 14, 26, 27, 28, Q
60 – 62, 61 (Ter Borch), 5 129 – 130, 131, 134, 186 – 187 (detail) Quadacker, Freda, 146
A Horse Stable (cat. 26), 27, 112, 113 Man on Horseback (Ter Borch), 44 Olijcan, Maria, 182 Quadacker, Hermannus, 183
Van der Horst, Gerard, The Entry of Adriaen Man on Horseback, Seen from Rear Van Ostade, Adriaen, The Knife Grinder, 105 Quast, Pieter, 5
Pauw into Münster (Ter Borch), 63, 64 (Ter Borch), 4 Van Ostade, Isaac, 105; The Halt at the Inn, 60
Houbraken, Arnold, 2, 8, 16 – 17, 27, 52, 74 Van Mander, Karel, 36; Het Schilder-boeck R
Van Hulle, Anselm, 66 (Book of Painting), 21 P The Reading Lesson (cat. 18), 27, 87 – 88, 89 , 96
Manet, Edouard, 20 Palamedesz, Anthonie, Guardroom with Offi Van Reede van Nederhorst, Godard (cat. 10),
I Van der Marck, Johan, 167 cer Receiving a Letter, 126; Officer Reading 66, 67
The Introduction (An Officer Making His Bow Marienburgh, Gertruid (portrait by a Letter, 126 Rembrandt van Rijn, 14; Nightwatch, 64;
to a Lady) (cat. 36), 27, 81, 141 – 143, 142 Ter Borch), 159 Pancras, Aletta, 177 Self-Portrait, 97
Marienburgh, Willem (portrait by Pancras, Gerbrand (cat. 49), 16, 177 – 179, 178 Renialme, Johannes, 16
J Ter Borch), 159 Pancras, Nicolaes, 16, 177 Riders Stopping before an Inn (Ter Borch), 62
Jan Baghstoren, Rode Toren, and Onze Lieve Market at Evening in Zwolle (Ter Borch), 6 Paternal Admonition. See Gallant Conversa Roeks, Mecheltien, 182
Vrouwe Kerk, with Boats Docked along the Mary, princess of Orange, 16 tion (known as Paternal Admonition) Roldanus, Joost, 8, 13
Rode Torenplein, Zwolle (Ter Borch), 2 Matthys, Geertruyt, 8, 12, 13, 16, 112, 167 (cat. 27) Romanets, A., A Glass of Lemonade (after
De Jongh, Ludolf, 26 Matthys, Wiesken, 4, 11, 96, 152 Paternal Admonition (Ter Borch), 35, 114 , 116 Ter Borch), 152 , 153
Jordis, Henrik, 154 De Mayerne, Theodore, 36 Pauw van Heemstede, Adriaen (cat. 8), 9, 13, Rouse, Joan, 182
De’ Medici, Cosimo III, 16 63 – 64, 65 , 66, 70, 100 Rouse, Lucretia (cat. 51), 16, 182 – 183, 185
K Metsu, Gabriel, 16, 134; Interior of a Smithy, Peñaranda, Count of, Caspar de Bracamonte Van Ruysdael, Isaack, 99
De Keyser, Thomas, 53 105; Man Writing a Letter, 130 ; Woman y Guzman (cat. 12), 9 – 10, 13, 16, 70, 71, Van Ruytenburgh, Anna (cat. 9), 63 – 64, 65
Kick, Simon, 53 Reading a Letter with a Maidservant, 130 72, 78 Van Ruytenburgh, Willem, 64
Van Kinschot, Caspar (cat. 11), 68, 69 Miel, Jan, 90 Petrarch, 11, 116, 123, 140, 141
Koets, Roelof, 13, 153 Van Mieris, Frans, 2, 40; Child’s Lesson, 88 Philip IV, king of Spain, 8 – 9, 13, 16, 70 S
Krul, Jan Hermansz, 12, 104; Eerlycke Molenaer, Jan Miense, 47 De Piles, Roger, Cours de Peinture par Principe, Sadeler, Aegidius, 4
Tytkorting (Honorable Pastimes), 124 Molijn, Pieter, 6, 7, 44, 46, 52, 99; Grote Markt, 32, 33 , 35 Saint Luke’s Guild, Haarlem, 6, 47
Haarlem, at Night, 22, 23; Horsemen in Portrait of a Gentleman (cat. 22), 100, 101 Scene in an Inn (cat. 15), 78 – 80, 79
L front of an Inn (Ter Borch), 9, 60 – 62, 61 Portrait of a Lady (Ter Borch), 35 Van der Schalcke, Gerard (portrait by
A Lady at Her Toilet (cat. 34), 12, 15 (detail), Moonen, Arnoldus, 182, 183 Portrait of a Man (cat. 4), 9, 53 – 54, 55 , 56 Ter Borch), 75
18 – 19 (detail), 26, 27, 118, 135 – 137, 136 De Moor, Karel, Jan van Goyen (after Portrait of a Man (cat. 5), 9, 56, 57, 58 Van der Schalcke, Helena (cat. 14), 58, 75 – 77, 76
Lady Drinking While Holding a Letter (cat. 41), Ter Borch), 99 Portrait of a Man Aged Forty-Two Schellinger, Sijbrand, 177
154 – 157, 155 , 157 The Music Lesson (cat. 47), 14, 35, 171 – 172, 173 , (Ter Borch), 56 Schouman, Aert, 96
A Lady Reading a Letter (Ter Borch), 154, 156 176, 190 – 191 (detail) Portrait of a Woman (cat. 6), 9, 58, 59 Self-Portrait (cat. 45), 165 – 167, 166
Van Laer, Pieter (“Bamboccio”), 8, 52; The The Music Party (cat. 48), 14, 35, 171 – 172, Portrait of a Woman Aged Thirty Self-Portrait (Ter Borch), 165
Flagellants, 50 174 – 176, 175 (Ter Borch), 58
Van Musscher, Michiel, 16, 99, 153, 182
226
Six, Jan, 9 T Van de Velde, Jan, Gentleman Greeting Woman at a Mirror (cat. 16), 10, 12, 27, 30 – 31
Smith, John, 17, 134 Teniers, David, II, 8, 10, 47, 78, 110; Le Medecin a Lady, 143 (detail), 39 (detail), 39 – 40, 40 (detail), 81 – 83,
Soldiers in an Inn (Ter Borch), 120 de Village (The Village Doctor), 8, 47, 49 ; Van de Venne, Adriaen, 105 82
Starter, Jan Jansz, Friesche Lusthof, 143 Peasants in a Tavern, 122 Vermeer, Johannes, 2, 15, 102; Lady Woman at Her Dressing Table (Ter Borch), 84
Steen, Jan, 2, 10, 47, 87; Lovesickness, 152 Thoré, Theophile (pseudonym, W. Bürger), Writing a Letter with Her Maid, Woman Combing a Child’s Hair (cat. 19), 11, 27,
Strozzi, Bernardo, 83 20, 29 132 , 134 90, 91, 92 (detail), 96, 118
Van Suchtelen, Gerhard, 146 Three Soldiers Making Merry (cat. 29), 25, De Vicq, François, 177 Woman Drinking Wine with a Sleeping Soldier
Van Suchtelen, Jan, 146 120 – 122, 121 Vinckboons, David, 141 (Ter Borch), 156
Van Suchtelen, Maria Wedeus (portrait by The Town Council of Deventer (cat. 44), 14, 16, Vingboons, Philips, 162 A Woman Playing the Theorbo for a Cavalier
Ter Borch), 146, 148 158 (detail), 162 – 164, 163 Visscher, Roemer, Sinepoppen, 90 (Ter Borch), 174 , 176
The Suitor’s Visit (cat. 30), 13, 14, 15 (detail), 26, Trip, Elias, 182 Van Voerst, Geesken, 4 Woman Sealing a Letter (cat. 33), 14, 28, 129,
27, 118, 123 – 124, 125 , 137 Two Studies of Gesina (Ter Borch), 81 Van Voerst, Robert (portrait by Ter Borch), 6 – 7, 132 – 134, 133
Suyderhoef, Jonas, The Swearing of the Oath 7, 20, 49 Woman Spinning (cat. 20), 10, 11 (detail), 27,
of Ratification of the Treaty of Münster, U Volpato manuscript, 36 94 – 96, 95
15 May 1648 (after Ter Borch), 74 The Unwelcome Call (cat. 23), 12, 25, 102 – 104, Woman Washing Her Hands (Ter Borch), 86
The Swearing of the Oath of Ratification of the 103 , 122 W Wybouts, Maria (portrait by Ter Borch), 58 , 75
Treaty of Münster, 15 May 1648 (cat. 13), 9, De Waert, Petronella, 177
16, 68 (detail), 70 (detail), 72 – 74, 73 , 78, 165 V Wentholt, Anna, 183 Y
(detail) Vasari, Giorgio, 36 Van der Werff, Adriaen, 40 Young Man Reading (cat. 50), 180, 181
Sweerts, Michael, 90; Woman Searching Velázquez, Diego, 8 – 9; Don Pedro de Wille, J. G., Instruction Paternelle, 114 Young People around a Table Drinking, Smok
for Lice, 11, 118 Barberana y Aparregui, 8, 9 ; Pablo Willem II, prince of Orange, 120 ing, and Making Music (Ter Borch), 22, 23
de Valladolid, 53 Willem III, prince of Orange, 16 A Young Woman at Her Toilet with a Maid
Van de Velde, Esaias, 3, 10, 22, 60, 97 Wiltschut, Adrianus, 34 (cat. 17), 27, 33 – 34, 84 – 86, 85
Young Woman Playing a Theorbo to Two Young
Men (Ter Borch), 171 – 172, 174 , 176
227 i n d e x
Photographic Credits Illustration details
Every effort has been made to locate the copyright comparative figures Title page: cat. 35
holders for the photographs used in this book. Any cat. 1, fig. 1: Photograph © 2003 Museum of Fine Pages xii – 1: cat. 2
omissions will be corrected in subsequent editions. Arts, Boston; cat. 4, fig. 2: Collection Netherlands Pages 18 – 19: cat. 34
Institute for Art History (RKD), The Hague; cat. 5, Pages 30 – 31: cat. 16
Kettering essay
fig. 1: © Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid; cat. 6, Pages 42 – 43: cat. 46
fig. 6: Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Art Resource,
fig. 3: © Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid; cat. 17, Pages 186 – 187: cat. 32
NY, Photo: F. Raux; fig. 8: Réunion des Musées
fig. 1: Collection Netherlands Institute for Art His- Pages 190 – 191: cat. 47
Nationaux/Art Resource, NY, Photo: RMN; fig. 10:
tory (RKD), The Hague; cat. 17, fig. 2: Staatliche
The Royal Collection © 2004, Her Majesty Queen
Kunstsammlungen Dresden; cat. 20, fig. 1: © Rijks-
Elizabeth II
museum-Stichting Amsterdam; cat. 20, fig. 2:
Wheelock essay © National Gallery, London; cat. 21, fig. 1: © Rijks-
fig. 7: Copyright © 2004 by Kimbell Art Museum museum Amsterdam; cat. 21, fig. 2: © Rijksmuseum-
Stichting Amsterdam; cat. 22, fig. 1: © Courtesy of
Wallert essay
the J. Paul Getty Museum; cat. 27, fig. 1: Bildarchiv
fig. 1: Photo courtesy of Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam
Preussischer Kulturbesitz/Art Resource, NY; cat. 28,
Catalogue fig. 1: Photo A. Plisson; cat. 32, figs. 1, 2: Reproduc-

tions courtesy of the National Gallery of Ireland;
catalogue objects cat. 33, fig. 1: Reproduction courtesy of the National
cat. 1: Ashmolean Musem, Oxford; cat. 2: Staatliche Gallery of Ireland; cat. 35, fig. 1: The Royal Collection
Museen zu Berlin — Bildarchiv Preussischer Kultur- © 2004, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II; cats. 39, 40,
besitz, Photo: Jörg P. Anders; cat. 4: © Fine Arts fig. 1: Photograph © 2004 Museum of Fine Arts,
Museums of San Francisco; cats. 5, 6: © Virginia Boston; cat. 43, figs. 1, 2: © National Gallery in
Museum of Fine Arts, Photo: Katherine Wetzel; Prague; cat. 44, fig. 1: Photo: Tom Haartsen, Holland;
cat. 7: Fotostudio Otto; cat. 13: © National Gallery, cat. 45, fig. 2: Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz/
London; cat. 17: Photograph © 1999 The Metropoli- Art Resource, Photo: Jörg P. Anders; cat. 47, fig. 1:
tan Museum of Art; cat. 18: Réunion des Musées Rijksprentenkabinet, Amsterdam; cat. 47, fig. 2:
Nationaux/Art Resource, NY, Photo: Gérard Blot; © The National Trust, Waddesdon Manor,
cat. 21: Fotostudio Heinz Preute, Vaduz; cat. 24: Photo: Mike Fear; cat. 49, fig. 1: © Christie’s Images
Staatliche Museen zu Berlin — Bildarchiv Preus- Inc. 2001
sischer Kulturbesitz, Photo: Jörg P. Anders 2003;
cats. 25, 26: © Courtesy of the J. Paul Getty Museum;
cat. 28: Photo © Joachim Blauel—Artothek; cat. 29:
Photo: Jean-Michel Routhier; cat. 30: Photo: Richard
Carafelli; cat. 31: © National Gallery, London;
cat. 34: Photograph © 1995 The Detroit Institute of
Arts; cat. 35: Photograph © 1987 The Metropolitan
Museum of Art; cat. 36: © The National Trust;
cat. 37: © National Gallery, London; cat. 38: © The
Cleveland Museum of Art, The Elisabeth Severance
Prentiss Collection; cat. 41: Central Art Archives,
Photo: Matti Janas; cats. 42, 43: Photograph © 1998
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Photo: Schechter
Lee; cat. 44: Atelier voor Restauratie & Research van
Schilderijen, Milko den Leeuw & Wouter van Hoog-
dalem, Den Haag/Amsterdam; cat. 47: Photo Inc.
11/89; cat. 48: Photo: Tony Walsh 9/1999; cat. 49:
© Manchester Art Gallery; cat. 50: Photograph
© 1993 The Detroit Institute of Arts; cat. 51: Collec-
tion Rijksmuseum Twenthe, Enschede. Loan Oud-
heidkamer ‘Riessen,’ Rijssen, Photo: R. Klein Gotink
228

Gerard Ter Borch

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gerard Ter Borch

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gerard Ter Borch

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gerard ter Borch

Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.

Alison McNeil Kettering

National Gallery of Art, Washington

Gerard ter Borch is supported by an p. cm.

xi Lenders to the Exhibition

1 The Artistic Development of Gerard ter Borch

19 Gerard ter Borch and the Modern Manner

31 The Miracle of Gerard ter Borch’s Satin

187 Letter from Gerard ter Borch the Elder

192 Notes to the Essays

196 Notes to the Catalogue:

Julia Brown Earl A. Powell III

Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. Kathryn L. Haw

Cincinnati Art Museum National Gallery of Art,

Richard and Marcia Ehrlich Private collections

Fine Arts Museums of San Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam

Manchester City Galleries The State Hermitage Museum,

Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts,

1 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

3 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

5 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

7 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

9 t h e a rt i st ic de v el opm en t of ger a r d t er borc h

Ter Borch’s Early Figurative Groups

took in their approach to military subjects. The tone of

Ter Borch’s Modernity

1633/1634, oil on canvas, 51.5 × 41 (20 @ × 16 ¡)

1635, oil on panel, 34.5 × 45.7 (13 ∞ × 18)

c. 1636/1640, oil on panel, 41.5 × 71.5 (16 & × 28 ¡)

c. 1639/1640, oil on copper, 48.6 × 35.7 (19 ¡ × 14 %)

c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #)

c. 1640, oil on copper, 48 × 35 (18 ¢ × 13 #)

Peter Molijn and Gerard ter Borch

c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.2 (6 * × 4 ¶)

9 Anna van Ruytenburgh, Wife of Adriaen Pauw

c. 1646, oil on copper, 16.3 × 12.5 (6 * × 4 •)

c. 1646, oil on copper, 15 × 11 (5 ¢ × 4 &)

by Ter Borch and both originally retained by the sitter’s

1646/1647, oil on copper, 11 × 8 (4 & × 3 ¡)

1647/1648, oil on copper, 10.5 × 9 (4¡ × 3∞)

1648, oil on copper, 45.4 × 58.5 (17 ¢ × 23 %)

Arnold Houbraken is to be believed, he set an impos-

c. 1648, oil on panel, 34 × 28.5 (13 ™ × 11 @)

c. 1648/1650, oil on panel, 24.7 × 18.4 (9 # × 7 @)

1650, oil on panel, 34 × 26 (13 ™ × 10 @)

c. 1650/1651, oil on wood, 47.6 × 34.6 (18 # × 13 £)

c. 1652, oil on panel, 27 × 25 (10 £ × 9 ¶)

c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 33.5 × 29 (13 ^ × 11 *)

1. Quiringh van In a simple interior distinguished by a shallow arched

c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 34.5 × 27.5 (13 ∞ × 10 ¶)

c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 20 × 16 (7 ¢ × 6 &)

warmth and informality of the likeness, as well, perhaps,

c. 1652/1653, oil on panel, 28 × 23 (11 × 9 %)

1653, oil on panel, 66.7 × 59.5 (26 @ × 23 *)

c. 1653, oil on canvas, 73.5 × 60.8 (28 • × 23 •)

work in the foreground to upstage the man’s work far-

c. 1653/1654, oil on panel, 47.5 × 50.2 (18 § × 19 #)

c. 1654, oil on panel, 45.3 × 53.5 (17 ¶ × 21 %)

c. 1654, oil on canvas, 71 × 73 (27 • × 28 #)

1. Quiringh van In a simple interior distinguished by a shallow arched

2. Gabriel Metsu, Woman