Officers and Other Civic Guardsmen of District V in Amsterdam, under the Command of Captain Cornelis de Graeff and Lieutenant Hendrick Laurensz

Entry

This civic guard piece was the second executed by Jacob Backer. His earlier portrait in this genre was dated 1638 and adorned the vestibule of the Kloveniersdoelen (the headquarters of the arquebusiers’ civic guard), but is now, unfortunately, lost.⁸ The present picture was also commissioned for that building, as one of three completed in 1642 for the long wall opposite the windows in the Great Hall, where it hung next to the entrance. The other two works were Nicolaes Eliasz Pickenoy’s portrait of the guardsmen of district IV, which had pride of place in the centre, and to the left of it Rembrandt’s Night Watch (fig. a).⁹ This side of the room originally had six small windows, each flanked by pilasters. The windows had to be bricked up and the wall made flat in order to accommodate the paintings.¹⁰

The three canvases were the largest civic guard pieces ever executed, and were probably the largest paintings in Amsterdam at the time. While a few of the group portraits made earlier for the other two civic guard headquarters were wider, these were a metre or more taller than their nearest competitors. In their present states Pickenoy’s is the widest at 527 centimetres and Backer’s the highest at 367 centimetres. Seventeenth-century reduced copies of Rembrandt’s and Backer’s pictures indicate that the prototypes were cut down on all sides. The greatest loss occurred to the left of The Night Watch, while the Backer was cropped the most on the right, where an entire figure at the top was removed (fig. b).¹¹ Martin, who published the copy after Backer’s painting in 1933, calculated the size of the original to have been 379 by 549 centimetres.¹² Based on the widths of the three individual pieces of canvas that make up the support of Backer’s picture and seventeenth-century standardized loom width, Colenbrander has more recently suggested that it would have been originally 418 centimetres high.¹³ By dividing the total length of the long wall (1,736 centimetres) minus the estimated room taken up by pilasters which may or may not have existed (121.5 centimetres) by three, Colenbrander estimated the widths of the three portraits that adorned it to have been 537.8 centimetres.¹⁴ However, only X-radiography can provide a factual basis for determining the work’s original dimensions.

Unlike Rembrandt in The Night Watch, Backer took his painting’s corner location in the Great Hall into consideration by placing some of the guardsmen on a flight of steps. Inspired by Joachim von Sandrart’s 1640 civic guard piece in the same room,¹⁵ this motif closes the composition on the right and takes advantage of the height of the canvas as comparison with Pickenoy’s portrait demonstrates, where the majority of the men constitute a frieze at the bottom. The diagonal created by the staircase and those formed by the pikes, muskets and other weapons, as well as the company’s banner, impart a sense of dynamism, leading the eye to the far left of the picture where Captain Cornelis de Graeff is seated. By putting the most important sitter here, De Graeff was as close as possible to the centre of the Great Hall.¹⁶ Some authors have suggested that the structures on the left were arranged on a diagonal so that they would link up with the ones in Pickenoy’s canvas.¹⁷ However, the porch in front of the building in Backer’s painting makes it unlikely that the structure was intended as the side wall of the house in Pickenoy’s work. Rather, the sole function of the non-descript architecture on the left of Backer’s portrait is the creation of depth. The numerous pikes on the right of the composition and the two guardsmen next to them seen from behind, also contribute to the sense of recession. As is the case with the pikes, the bearers of the two muskets being fired to the left of centre are not in view. Their presence here, and that of the two musketeers depicted more or less in the middle, serve to emphasize the fact that the musket was the privileged weapon of the arquebusiers. According to Haverkamp-Begemann the still life of armour at the lower right symbolizes the civic guard’s role as protector of Amsterdam’s citizens.¹⁸

Jan van Dyk, the supervisor of the city’s art collection, states in his 1758 catalogue of the works in the Town Hall that the sitters in three of the six Kloveniersdoelen civic guard pieces – which by this time had all been transferred to Dam square – were identified above or below the paintings,¹⁹ presumably on wooden boards, although Van Dyk does not explicitly say so. The one attached to Bartholomeus van der Helst’s portrait ²⁰ has alone survived and dates to around 1715, when the picture had been relocated to the Grote Krijgsraadkamer (Great Council of War Chamber) in the Town Hall. The other two civic guard pieces that were given such shields were Backer’s and Pickenoy’s. In his discussion of the latter, Van Dyk specifies that it had been placed above the work when still in the Kloveniersdoelen.²¹ Pickenoy’s canvas was most likely moved to the Town Hall in 1753. The date of the transfer of Backer’s portrait is not documented, but was probably in or before 1715, when The Night Watch was trimmed in order to be mounted on a short wall in the Kleine Krijgsraadkamer (Small Council of War Chamber). Backer’s picture must have already been installed on the longer wall of this room, where it was later recorded to be hanging, otherwise that spot would have gone to The Night Watch and there would have been no need to reduce its width.²² It stands to reason that Backer’s painting was already equipped with a name board before it left the Kloveniersdoelen as Van Dyk published the names of Pickenoy’s guardsmen in his description of Backer’s group portrait and vice versa.²³ This would not have occurred if Backer’s work had been given a shield only after it had been relocated to the Town Hall.

The guardsmen immortalized by Backer served district V, the area to the south of the IJ, between Damrak and Singel.²⁴ Cornelis de Graeff was appointed its company’s captain on 25 June 1638. He was the eldest child of the wealthy merchant and six time burgomaster Jacob de Graeff, and a cousin of Cornelis Bicker, who as captain of district XIX was portrayed by Von Sandrart in the earliest painting made for the Great Hall of the Kloveniersdoelen.²⁵ Cornelis de Graeff was also a distant cousin of Roelof Bicker, the captain of district VIII in Van der Helst’s civic guard piece for the same room.²⁶ The familial ties with the Bickers were repeatedly reinforced, for example by the marriages of De Graeff’s sisters Agniet and Christina with Cornelis Bicker’s brothers Jan and Jacob in 1625 and 1642.²⁷ Later, in 1646, De Graeff’s younger brother Andries would marry Cornelis Bicker’s daughter Elisabeth. Together these two families dominated Amsterdam’s city council for decades. Cornelis de Graeff’s own political career started in 1636 and beginning in 1643 he served nine terms as burgomaster. After the sudden death of Stadholder Willem II in 1650, he and the anti-Orangist States faction to which he belonged controlled the finances and politics of the Republic. In addition to Cornelis and Roelof Bicker, he was related to the captain portrayed in The Night Watch; De Graeff’s first wife, who died two months after their wedding, was Geertruyd Overlander, whose elder sister Maria was married to Frans Banninck Cocq, the commander of the company of district II depicted in Rembrandt’s civic guard painting.

Seated next to De Graeff is Lieutenant Hendrick Laurensz, who had served in this capacity since 1620. His right hand is held to his heart, which was a much-used portrait gesture denoting faithfulness, and the partisan in his left hand resting on his lap was the weapon associated with his rank. While the names of the captain and lieutenant are known from Gerard Schaep’s 1653 list of the paintings in the three civic guard headquarters, Van Dyk transcribed those of most of the other sitters in 1758 from the no longer extant shield of Backer’s picture. His list is not complete, however, as it contains only 23 names, whereas there were 25 guardsmen in Backer’s portrait before it was cut down, not including those whose faces are not visible.

The ensign, Joachim Jansz Scheepmaker, stands in the centre of the painting. As the leader of one of four companies composed of volunteers from the Amsterdam civic guard that went to Zaltbommel in 1625 to assist the States army, Scheepmaker was possibly the only sitter in Backer’s portrait to have taken an active part in the fight against the Spanish.²⁸

The company’s two sergeants can be recognized as such by their halberds. One of them wears a sleeveless buff coat and stands to the right of Scheepmaker, who addresses him. The other is the towering figure dressed in black on the left looking down at Captain De Graeff. As he appears to be the elder of the two, he can be tentatively identified as Jan Gerritsz van Leeuwarden, who was 15 years older than his fellow sergeant, Theunis Jansz Visch.

Three of the regular guardsmen were also painted by other artists. Hendrick Jansz Cruywagen is probably the husband and father in a family portrait from the early 1640s attributed to Jacob van Loo,²⁹ and has been identified as the guardsman on the far right that was cut away from Backer’s picture, but can be seen in the copy after it (fig. b).³⁰ Jan Jacobsz Lansman and Marten Canter were portrayed by Jürgen Ovens in 1656 as regents of the Oude Zijds Huiszittenhuis (Outdoor Poor Relief Board) (fig. c).³¹ Lansman, who was about 38 years old at the time, was the youngest of Ovens’s sitters and, at about age 24 or 25 when Backer’s painting was made, he is also one of the youngest guardsmen shown. In that case there are only two figures who can be qualified as Lansman: the blond-haired man wearing a feathered hat at the top of the stairs and the one wearing a silver doublet descending it. Given the resemblance to the regent on the far right in Ovens’s canvas, the last option seems the best fit. Unlike Lansman, Canter does not stand out in either portrait because of his age. Also included in Ovens’s painting is Cornelis Hoppesack, who was born in the same year as Canter, 1603.³² Considering the ages of the other sitters, Canter is probably either the regent seated second from the right or the standing grey-haired man retrieving the account books from the cupboard.³³ The latter figure is possibly an older version of the guardsman with a red sash standing at the bottom of the stairs in Backer’s picture.

As was often the case, the captain and lieutenant did not live in the district they served, contrary to all the other guardsmen whose biographies could be determined.³⁴ The herring trade was located in district V, so it comes as little surprise that six of the sitters were herring merchants.³⁵ Among them were the two sergeants; the last name of the younger one, Theunis Jans Visch, matched his profession perfectly. Two of the others involved in the trade, Marten Canter (Coeckebacker) and Gerrit Benning Coeckebacker, were brothers, as was their brother-in-law, guardsman Willem Jansz van Midlum. Most of the remaining men were merchants or manufacturers of a variety of goods, including cloth, wine, rope, sails and iron, while Lieutenant Hendrick Laurensz and Jan Evertsz van Heerden were booksellers and publishers. Guardsman Hendrick Rijcksz had been a fine art painter before taking over his father-in-law’s knife-making business. A wine tax farmer by profession, Ensign Scheepmaker also had creative inclinations; he was an occasional poet and friend of Gerbrand Adriaensz Bredero and Joost van den Vondel.³⁶

When one considers the fact that Pickenoy made full-length wedding pendants of – the then captain-to-be – Cornelis de Graeff and his second wife Catharina Hooft in 1636,³⁷ and had portrayed the guardsmen of probably district V, including Lieutenant Hendrick Laurensz, previously in 1630,³⁸ the question arises why he was not awarded the commission for the present picture. By that time Pickenoy may, of course, simply have already been asked by Captain Jan Claesz van Vlooswijck of district IV to paint his company for the Kloveniersdoelen headquarter,³⁹ but a better explanation is that Backer, like his sitters, resided in district V. Backer’s address in Amsterdam is not documented, but it seems likely that he lived in the bakery at no. 6 Nieuwendijk that was run by his brother Tjerck.⁴⁰ The shop was close to the houses and businesses of a number of the guardsmen, including that of Theunis Jansz Visch only a few doors down at no. 19.⁴¹

The possibility that Backer was a resident of district V, and could therefore have served as a member of its civic guard company, would support Van Hall’s identification of the man on the staircase at the far right of the current, cut-down painting as the artist himself.⁴² However, despite the resemblance to a 1638 drawn self-portrait by Backer,⁴³ this is not a plausible hypothesis. Speaking against it is Backer’s religious background, as Mennonites were not permitted to bear arms nor to swear oaths to secular powers, and, therefore, were exempt from serving in the civic guard.⁴⁴ Although he was not an official member of the Mennonite Church during his years in Amsterdam and in 1651 had himself baptized a Remonstrant, it is not known at which point he abandoned his original faith.⁴⁵ Of greater importance is the fact that he does not appear in Van Dyk’s list of the guardsmen depicted. It could be argued that Van der Helst, who most likely included himself in his civic guard piece, is not recorded by Van Dyk either, but he is dressed as a civilian not as a soldier. All figures in the present painting, on the contrary, wear military apparel or carry weapons. Thus, if Backer did portray himself here he would have been a guardsman for district V, and his name would have occurred in Van Dyk’s list.

Jonathan Bikker, 2023

THE SITTERS, THEIR RANKS, RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS, OCCUPATIONS AND ADDRESSES (in the order as on the name board)

Cornelis de Graeff (1599-1664)
Captain of district V since 25 June 1638. Reformed. Merchant. In 1636, he became a director of the Dutch East India Company (VOC). After his father’s death in 1638, he acquired the title Lord of Zuid-Polsbroek. His political functions included that of alderman (1640) and burgomaster (1643, 1648, 1651, 1652, 1655, 1656, 1658, 1659, 1661 and 1662).⁴⁶

Hendrick Laurensz (1588-1649)
Lieutenant of district V since 1620. Reformed. Bookseller and publisher. Lived on Damrak (no. 49) in district III.⁴⁷

Joachim Jansz Scheepmaker (?-1657)
Ensign. He succeeded Hendrick Laurensz by 1646 as lieutenant of district V and became captain of district XVII in 1650. Remonstrant. Wine tax farmer. Lived on Raamskooi in district V.⁴⁸

Theunis Jansz Visch (1605-1653)
Sergeant ? In 1650 he became lieutenant of district XVII. Reformed. Herring merchant. Lived on Nieuwendijk (no. 19) in district V.⁴⁹

Jan Gerritsz van Leeuwarden (1590-?)
Sergeant ? Reformed. Herring merchant. Lived on Prins Hendrikkade in district V.⁵⁰

Marten Canter (Coeckebacker) (1603-1672)
Ensign in 1650, lieutenant in 1657 and captain in 1667 of district XVII. Reformed. Herring merchant. Lived in the house called ‘De Drie Vergulde Haringen’ on Prins Hendrikkade in district V, which had belonged to his father Gerrit Jacobsz Coeckebacker.⁵¹
Brother of Gerrit Benning Coeckebacker and brother-in-law of Willem Jansz van Midlum (both also portrayed).

Hans van der Elst (Rotterdam 1590/91-after 1674)
Remonstrant. Herring merchant. When his wedding banns were posted in 1621 he was living on Prins Hendrikkade in district V. The same address was recorded in 1631.⁵²

Warnar Wiggertsz (Tournai 1581/82-?)
Reformed. Cloth dyer. Lived on Nieuwendijk in district V.⁵³

Adam Gerritsz (1593/94-?)
Reformed. Maker of stained-glass windows. Lived on Raamskooi in district V.⁵⁴

Hendrick Jansz Cruywagen (1598-1659/61)
Captain of district LIII between 1652 and 1659. Remonstrant. Sail manufacturer and merchant. Lived on Singel (no. 2) in district V.⁵⁵

Hendrick Rijcksz (1596/97-1643)
Reformed. Painter and later knife manufacturer. Lived on Prins Hendrikkade (no. 43) in district V.⁵⁶

Elias de Haes (Beverwijk 1603-1650)
Reformed. Cloth merchant. Purchased a house on Oude Braak in district V in 1641.⁵⁷

Cornelis Cornelisz Karsseboom (1608-1646)
Reformed. Merchant. Lived on Damrak in district III and from 1639 until his death on Herengracht (no. 37) in district I.⁵⁸

Barent Harmensz Bronswinckel (1599/1600-1659)
Reformed. Wine merchant. His address is listed as Haarlemmer Houttuinen in district V in 1631. Purchased a house on Prins Hendrikkade in district V in 1642, where he lived until his death.⁵⁹

Willem Jansz van Midlum (Grotebroek 1599/1600-1670)
Reformed. Herring merchant. Lived in a house called ‘De Drie Haringen’ on Prins Hendrikkade in district V.⁶⁰
Brother-in-law of Marten Canter (Coeckebacker) and Gerrit Benning Coeckebacker (both also portrayed).⁶¹

Hendrick Pauwelsz
This guardsman has not been identified.

Jan Gerritsz Parijs (1596-after 1654)
Reformed. Shipping agent. He may be identical with the ‘Jan Gerritsz’ living on Damrak in district V listed in 1631.⁶²

Gerrit Benning Coeckebacker (1606-before 1667)
Reformed. Herring merchant. When his wedding banns were posted in 1635 he was living on Prins Hendrikkade in district V.⁶³
Brother of Marten Canter (Coeckebacker) and brother-in-law of Willem Jansz van Midlum (both also portrayed).

Hendrick Aertsz de Keijzer (1607-after 1653)
Reformed. Iron merchant. In 1653, he was living on Damrak in district V. He was a cousin of the painter Thomas de Keyser.⁶⁴

Jan Jacobsz Lansman (1618-1666)
Sergeant of presumably district XXXII in 1651, where he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant on 20 August 1658. He became captain of district XVII on 10 August 1663. Reformed. Rope manufacturer and from 1665 until his death director of Levantine trade. Lived on Nieuwendijk (no. 70) in district V.⁶⁵

Willem Jansz Buys
This guardsman has not been identified.

Jan Evertsz van Heerden (Heerde 1581-?)
Reformed. Bookseller and publisher. Lived in a house called ‘De Delftsche Bijbel’ on Damrak in district V.⁶⁶

Jan Evertsz Mattijs
This guardsman has not been identified.

See Key to abbreviations, Rijksmuseum painting catalogues and Acknowledgements