RKD STUDIES

The work of Peter Lely (1618-1680) and of Gerard Soest can be regarded as both continuing and adapting van Dyck’s style, although in view of their origins these artists must be considered Dutch.¹ Both arrived in England during the final decade of Charles I’s reign. Peter Lely trained under Frans de Grebber in Haarlem. In 1641 – when van Dyck was temporarily away – he followed William II of the Netherlands to England.² Apart from the brief journey that he undertook in 1656/7 Lely remained in England and thus became an English painter. In principle, this distinguishes him from all the other Dutch artists active in England considered hitherto, who spent only part of their lives in the country. A combination of the styles of both van Dyck and Lely, rooted in an older tradition (to which the Dutch had made a major contribution) gradually laid the ground for an English style of portraiture, of which later Dutch portraitists who worked in England were obliged to take account if they wanted to satisfy the prevailing taste in that country. Although Lely’s works are occasionally confused with those of van Dyck, whom he initially imitated in formal aspects of the pose and in the arrangement of the folds in textiles, his style is consistently clumsier and more heavy-handed. On the other hand, his portraits are more expressive and exhibit greater character. No works are known from Lely’s Dutch period,³ but there is clear evidence of his Dutch training in his self-portrait with his family (collection of Lord Lee of Fareham) [1], which one would be more inclined to attribute to a painter who studied in Utrecht rather than one who trained in Haarlem.⁴ The same is true of the outdoor gathering (Floyd collection, London) and other Arcadian pictures, such as the Rape of Europa [3] owned by the Duke of Devonshire, and the Idyll in the possession of Sir Edmund Davis [2].⁵ A number of nude studies on blue paper can be compared with similar works by Jacob Backer. However, they are more elegant – and this is a key indicator of Lely’s study of van Dyck. Many of Lely’s portraits have the style of Caspar Netscher and Abraham van den Tempel (family portrait, Antrobus collection, Hatfield, 1660) [4], although essentially he was an English artist whose approach would be adopted by a whole host of successors, including such Dutch artists as Joseph Bokshoorn (c. 1650-c. 1685), Willem Wissing (c. 1656-1687), Jacob Huysmans (c. 1630-1696), Remee van Leemput (1607-1675) and Hendrick Sonnius (c. 1615-after 1688).

1
Peter Lely
The Concert, 1640s
London (England), Courtauld Institute of Art, inv./cat.nr. P.1947.LF.216

2
Peter Lely
Idyllic landschape with figures, c. 1650
London (England), private collection Sir Edmund Davis

Like Lely, Gerard Soest (c. 1605-1681) allegedly also hailed from Soest (Soest in Westphalia or the village near Utrecht?)⁶, and despite his foreign origins, like Lely, his place is entirely in English art. I know of no early works [by him] in the style of the Utrecht painters. Soest probably arrived in England in 1646. His first English works were painted in a competent manner and with a distinctive sense of space. However, he soon began to imitate van Dyck’s work, with which William Dobson will probably have familiarised him, until he gradually developed his own English style.⁷

Few Dutch portraitists went to England during the decade of the Commonwealth, although the style of that period, which is exemplified by the works of Robert Walker (died 1658) had a greater affinity with earnest Dutch portraits than with the elegant paintings of van Dyck. It is certainly no accident that Walker’s self-portrait in Hampton Court [5] (copy in the National Portrait Gallery, no. 753) was formerly attributed to Adriaen Hanneman, since it is so very Dutch.⁸ In around 1656, Christiaen Jansz. Dusart (1618-1682), who was born in Antwerp but trained in Amsterdam, must have been in London, where he painted the portrait of Krister Karlsons Bonde (Bonde collection, Stockholm) [6] who went to England that year.⁹ Dusart was back in Amsterdam in 1658. Mention could be made here as well of David Loggan (1634-1692), although this study does not generally include engravers. Born in Danzig to a Scottish father, Loggan trained in Amsterdam under Crispijn de Passe II, in whose studio he worked for seven years. He went to London in 1653 and became very famous for his portrait of Cromwell [7-8].¹⁰ His little portrait drawings clearly illustrate the training he underwent at the hands of Dutch engravers. They are occasionally reminiscent of the finely executed works of Cornelis Visscher II and Johannes Thopas. His pupil, Robert White (1645-1703), persevered with his style. The English engraver John Payne was likewise a de Passe student – of Simon de Passe in London. Also worthy of note are two portraits of William Penn and Sarah Shalleroos (Howe auction, London, 7 December 1933, no. 21) [9-10] which an otherwise completely unknown painter by the name of F. van Hees signed and dated 1656. His name indicates that he was a Dutchman, which is in keeping with his style of painting.¹¹

5
Robert Walker
Self portrait, c. 1645
Great Britain, private collection The Royal Collection, inv./cat.nr. RCIN 402581

6
Christiaen Jansz. Dusart
Portrait of friherre Krister Karlsson Bonde (1621-1659), dated 1656
Private collection

The restoration of the Stuarts (1660) heralded better times for Dutch portraitists. English painting had grown out of its infancy, however, and foreign artists therefore had to content themselves with a more modest role. In 1662 Dirk Stoop (c. 1618-1681/1686) – a name that we are already familiar with – travelled to London in the entourage of the wife of Charles II, Catherine of Braganza (1638-1705), for whom he had previously worked in Portugal.¹² Stoop also painted her portrait (National Portrait Gallery, no. 2563) [11] which, against the many English portraits of the time, stands out very clearly as a Dutch portrait. He made a number of delightful etchings to record the various feasts and celebrations that were held on the occasion of her wedding [12].¹³

Pieter Nason (1612-1688/90) must have been in England in about 1663. We are familiar with his portrait of the Earl of Shaftesbury [13] which dates from that year. Jakob von Sandrart made an engraving of Charles II after Nason’s portrait [14].¹⁴ We also find Nason’s name mentioned in the settlement made by the executors of Lely’s will under ‘debts to painters’: ‘To Mr. Nason in full £16.15’.¹⁵ Nason was in Amsterdam in 1664 and in Berlin shortly afterwards. Jan de Baen (1633-1702) was a typical representative of Dutch portrait painting at the court of Charles II. Arnold Houbraken reports that the king sent a yacht to have him brought from Holland. That must have occurred before 1668, however, because his portrait in the museum in Göteborg is inscribed ‘J. de Baen hagh 1668’ [15]. He painted Charles II, his children and various court dignitaries.¹⁶ Later on, in 1676, he was appointed court painter in Berlin. Pieter Borselaer (c. 1632-1692) was active in England at about the same time. He painted various portraits for the Hoby and Dugdale families, some of which are still in the possession of their descendants. They match the quality of portraits by Nicolaes Maes and Caspar Netscher, the best of which demonstrate a fine treatment worthy of Gerard ter Borch II. The lady of the Hoby family in Bisham Abbey [16], in particular, looks just like the ladies in similar works by Netscher and Maes.¹⁷

Dirk Stoop or after Dirk Stoop
Portrait of Catherine of Braganza (1638-1705), future Queen of England, c. 1660-1661
London (England), National Portrait Gallery, inv./cat.nr. NPG 2563

12
Dirk Stoop
Triumphal procession on water at the arrival in London of King Charles II and Queen Catherine of Braganza, dated 1662
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv./cat.nr. RP-P-1879-A-3177

Pictures painted in the manner of Maes and Netscher could frequently be found in England at this time. Netscher himself probably never visited that country and nor did Maes, although Charles II did urge William Temple (1628-1699) to have him come to England.¹⁸ Netscher painted all his portraits of English individuals at The Hague, including the ones of the aforementioned Sir William Temple and of his relatives [17].¹⁹ On the other hand, pupils of Netscher such as the younger Simon van der Does (1653-1718) (Weyerman called him Jacob van der Does)²⁰ and Johannes van Brandt (c. 1665-in or after 1698)²¹ do seem to have worked in England. Netscher’s son, Theodorus Netscher, sold a Jupiter and Calisto [18] painted by his father to a Scotsman in Paris for the sum of 200 pistoles.²² Horatius Paulijn (c.1644-1684) also painted a number of portraits in England in the style of Caspar Netscher and of Pieter Verelst after his planned pilgrimage to the Holy Land came to nothing [19].²³

17
Caspar Netscher
Portrait of William Temple (1628-1699), dated 1675
London (England), National Portrait Gallery, inv./cat.nr. 3812

We have already pointed out that among the assistants, pupils and copyists of Peter Lely were quite a large number of Dutch artists who went to England during the 1670s and 1680s. Jeremias van der Eyden (1635-1695) from Brussels, who had trained in The Hague under Adriaen Hanneman, was mentioned as ‘a coppyst correcting M. Lely’s faults’. At Belvoir Castle there is a series of copies that he made after works by Lely. After the death of the artist whom he so revered, van der Eyden settled in Northamptonshire, where he received numerous commissions from aristocratic clients.²⁴ Matthias de Mele (1664-1714/24) was so adept in his imitations of Lely that his portrait of Mary Stuart, which belonged to Mattheus Verheyden, a painter from The Hague, was widely regarded as an original [20].²⁵ Henry Ferguson (1665?-1730) was another artist employed in Lely’s studio, and Joseph Bokshoorn (active 1670s) (or Buckshorn) copied paintings by both van Dyck and Lely, for whom he was required to paint draperies [21].²⁶ He was not mentioned in the settlement made by the executors of Lely’s will, however, although Hendrik Sonnius (died in or after 1688) was. The latter, together with Willem Wissing, Prosper Henricus Lankrink (1628-1692) and Baptiste [= Jan Baptist Jaspers, c. 1620-1691] (two Flemings), was obliged to complete Lely’s unfinished pictures.²⁷ It is easy to imagine that there was little that was intrinsically Dutch in copying work, and thus in this case it would be inappropriate to talk about the dissemination of Dutch art abroad. Willem Wissing (c. 1656-1687) was employed as a court portraitist under both Charles II and James II. The latter sent him to Holland to paint portraits of the young William III and Mary Stuart [James II’s daughter][22-23]. He painted in the manner of Jan de Baen, although in his English works he modelled himself on Kneller. Wissing’s works were very popular in England, and many of them served as models for mezzotints. He died in 1687 in the house of the Earl of Essex in Northamptonshire.²⁸ Jan van der Vaart (c. 1653-1727), who arrived in London in 1674 and studied under Thomas Wijck, was mentioned as Wissing’s assistant. He was a friend of the portraitist Simon Dubois (1632-1708), whose self-portrait he inherited.²⁹ The best way to get to know his work is to study the mezzotints after them [24]. Van der Vaart was one of the first to employ this technique and taught the well-known English mezzotinter John Smith (1652-1743).³⁰ He was assisted by his nephew, John Arnold van der Vaart. Willem Sonmans (1650-1708) succeeded in gaining a foothold in London after Lely’s death. He worked alternately there and in Oxford, where he painted the founders of the university.³¹

20
Matthias de Mele
Portrait of mogelijk Mary II Stuart (1662-1695), dated 1693
The Hague, private collection Mattheus Verheyden

21
Joseph Bokshoorn
Portrait of Mary Isham (1654–1679), 1675
Northamptonshire (county), Lamport Hall, Lamport Hall Preservation Trust, inv./cat.nr. 92