Object data
oil on canvas
support: height 59.4 cm × width 47.2 cm
outer size: depth 6 cm (support incl. frame)
Anthony van Dyck (after)
in or after 1700
oil on canvas
support: height 59.4 cm × width 47.2 cm
outer size: depth 6 cm (support incl. frame)
…; sale, Josephus Augustinus Brentano (1754-1821, Amsterdam), Amsterdam (J. de Vries et al.), 13 May 1822, no. 174 (‘Koets (Roelof) hoog 6 palmen, 2 duimen; breed 5 palmen 2 duimen [approx. 65 x 55 cm] Doek Het Portret van Hendrik Kasimir, Graaf van Nassau, Stadhouder van Vriesland. Fiks in de manier van van Dÿk geschilderd’), fl. 31, to Jeronimo de Vries, for the museum1
Object number: SK-A-205
Copyright: Public domain
Anthony van Dyck (Antwerp 1599 - London 1641)
Anthony van Dyck was baptized in the Onze-Lieve-Vrouwekerk, Antwerp, on 22 March 1599, the seventh child of a prosperous haberdasher. He died on 9 December 1641 in Blackfriars, London, and was buried two days later in Saint Paul’s Cathedral. By then he was internationally famous, and had to his credit an oeuvre of well over seven hundred paintings, consisting mostly in portraits, but also some highly esteemed sacred and profane figure subjects. He had outlived Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640), who had greatly influenced him in his youth, by only some eighteen months, but he was to prove the more widely influential.
Enrolled as a pupil of Hendrik van Balen (1574/1575-1632) in 1609, he became a master in the Antwerp guild of St Luke nine years later before he was eighteen and a week before he received his majority – an event perhaps connected with this father’s financial difficulties which had begun in 1615 and ended with the sale of the family house in 1620, having caused strife in the family. In the meantime, Van Dyck had earlier entered Rubens’s studio, and had perhaps already operated unofficially as an artist working from a house in Antwerp called Den Dom van Ceulen. He was the only one of Rubens’s assistants to be named in the contract for the paintings for the Antwerp Jesuit Church signed on 22 March 1620.
There is no contemporary archival evidence for the existence of a studio functioning for Van Dyck before he left Antwerp for London and Rome. However, statements given in a lawsuit in Antwerp in 1660/1661 and the number of contemporary versions of some of Van Dyck’s works of that time would indicate at the least that there was a group of artists working in Van Dyck’s milieu, however informally.2
Van Dyck left Antwerp for London in October 1620; the purpose of his short visit – he was granted permission to leave at the end of the following February – is not known, but he received a payment from King James I (1566-1625) and was expected to return in eight months. He was recorded soon afterwards as living in Rome in the same house as George Gage (c. 1582-1632), an ‘Anglo-Catholic’ employed by the British crown to advance negotiations for the prince of Wales’s ‘Spanish match’ at the papal court.3
In Italy, Van Dyck was active in Rome, Venice, Genoa and Palermo.4 He re-established himself in 1627 in Antwerp, and was appointed court painter to the governor of the Spanish Netherlands, the Archduchess Isabella (1566-1633); his practice extended to The Hague whence he was summoned on two occasions.
By the summer of 1632, Van Dyck had settled in London; he was knighted by King Charles I (1600-1649) and then granted an annual pension as a retainer. But in the spring of 1634, he was in Antwerp and by the end of the year he was living in Brussels. By March 1635 he had returned to London and was established in a studio, specially converted by the architect Inigo Jones (1573-1652), on the Thames at Blackfriars. In great demand, not only by the king as a portrait painter, Van Dyck mixed with members of the court and married in 1640 Mary Ruthven, who was of a Scots noble family. In the autumn of 1640 he was in Antwerp, and early in 1641 briefly in Paris whence he returned hoping to gain the patronage of King Louis XIII (1601-1643) and Cardinal Richelieu (1585-1642). There in November, he wrote that he was very unwell; back in London with his wife for her lying-in, he died shortly after the birth of his daughter, Justiniana.
References
S.J. Barnes, N. de Poorter, O. Millar and H. Vey, Anthony van Dyck: A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, New Haven (Conn.)/London 2004, pp. 1-12
The sitter Michel Le Blon, from Frankfurt am Main and a cousin of the painter and engraver Joachim von Sandrart (1606-1688), was active as a diplomat, goldsmith, engraver and picture dealer. In this portrait he wears a black costume with a falling ruff.
Cornelis Apostool (1762-1844), first director of the Koninklijk Museum (Royal Museum, later the Rijksmuseum), bought this portrait without authorization.5 Maybe he spotted that it had been miscatalogued. The sitter and status of the work were correctly identified in the 1880 museum catalogue: it is a copy, without the hand, of the half-length portrait by Anthony van Dyck now in the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto.6 The engraving in reverse by Jacob Matham I (1571-1631) identifies the sitter.7
Vey has dated the Toronto picture to Van Dyck’s second Antwerp period (c. 1627-1632/1634). Le Blon is known to have visited Italy in 1627, where he could have met Van Dyck just before the latter’s return to Antwerp. The Rijksmuseum copy is probably of the eighteenth century, when the original seems still to have been in the Netherlands.
The identification of the present work with no. 174 in the Brentano sale of 1822 gives cause for confusion. The present sitter bears no resemblance to Hendrik Casimir I (1612-1640), Count of Nassau-Dietz (see SK-A-569), during whose lifetime the only Roelof Koets (I, 1592/1593-1655) known to be active was a still-life painter, or to Hendrik Casimir II (1657-1696), Prince of Nassau-Dietz, who could have been painted by the Zwolle-based Roelof Koets II (before 1650-1725). It is a possibility the present portrait when in the collection of Brentano was thought to be a copy by this Koets after Van Dyck, but this would still not explain the misidentification of the sitter as given in the sale catalogue. Hendrik Casimir I is not known to have sat to Van Dyck.
Gregory Martin, 2022
Vey in S.J. Barnes, N. de Poorter, O. Millar and H. Vey, Anthony van Dyck: A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, New Haven (Conn.)/London 2004, under no. III.93
1858, p. 79, no. 170 (as Roelof Koets, Portrait of Henric Casimir, Graf van Nassau); 1880, no. 470, pp. 399-400 (as of Michel Le Blon after Van Dyck); 1887, p. 40, no. 313; 1903, p. 91, no. 860; 1976, p. 210, no. A 205
G. Martin, 2022, 'after Anthony van Dyck, Portrait of Michel Le Blon (1587-1656), in or after 1700', in Flemish Paintings in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.8293
(accessed 27 December 2024 22:56:28).