Fleeting Senses and Enduring Love: de Lairesse and the van Rijn Children in the 17th Century

---

---

A tradition of the subjects sitting in the guise of historical, mythical, or allegorical subjects.

---

By Robert Wenley
Deputy Director
Barber Institute of Fine Arts
University of Birmingham

---

Introduction

Gerard de Lairesse (1640–1711) painted little more than a handful of portraits. A relatively high proportion of these, however, especially in the period between 1668 and 1672, are portraits historiés, in which the sitter or sitters are in the guise of historical, mythical, or allegorical subjects. In 2001, Glasgow Museums acquired Lairesse’s Allegory of the Senses, signed and dated 1668. This article explores and explains the complex iconography and unusually complete provenance of the Glasgow painting and identifies the sitters as the three children of Pieter van Rijn (1633–1712), Amsterdam merchant and marine auctioneer, and Elisabeth Bessels (1634–1708).

Lairesse and Portraiture

Despite his profound interest and ability in depicting the human figure and facial expressions, Gerard de Lairesse (1640–1711) painted little more than a handful of portraits. A relatively high proportion of these, however, especially in the period between 1668 and 1672, are portraits historiés, in which the sitter or sitters are in the guise of historical, mythical or allegorical subjects. The most direct is the small but striking Portrait of a Woman as Minerva of about 1670 in Sibiu, Romania; the sitter is unknown (fig. 1).¹ 

Of greater interest here is the square-format Apollo and Aurora, dated 1671, now in New York (fig. 2).² Rejecting Alain Roy’s suggestion that the figures represent the Apotheosis of William III,³ Walter Liedtke found persuasive evidence that the sitters are two of the children of the wealthy Amsterdam burgomaster Nicolas Pancras, namely his young son, Gerbrand (1658–1716), and daughter Maria (1662–1740).⁴ He proposed that Nicolas commissioned the painting, described in 1716 as a “Schoorsteen-stuck” or “chimneypiece,” as part of the decoration for his new house at no. 539 Herengracht, along with a set of eight grisaille canvases on the theme of the Triumph of Aemilius Paullus Macedonius (ca. 1670), now in Liège (Musée de l’Art Wallon).

Lairesse evidently disdained portraiture as a genre, later writing of it that he “wondered how any man can prefer slavery to liberty.”⁵ His solution lay in avoiding literal representations at all costs and instead “mixing the fashion with what is painter-like”—or, in other words, finding the necessary beauty, grace, and decorum by adopting the antique rather than the modern mode so as to make his portraits as much like history paintings as possible.⁶ One key advantage of this approach was that by providing his figures with the loose, classical (or quasi-classical) dress of the antique mode, appropriate for historical subjects, Lairesse made their costumes timeless and avoided the awkward consequence of them appearing dated owing to the constant changes of modern fashion.⁷ An extension of this use of clothing to create an antique manner was the introduction of appropriate props that alluded to the sitter. These could either be added to the background, or, as in a portrait historié, the whole subject might be given a historical, mythological, or allegorical setting, thereby elevating the status of the sitter through association with classical ideals.⁸

For Lairesse, then, one of the potential drawbacks of a portrait historié—that it could so easily be read as a straight history painting by anyone unfamiliar with the sitter—might if anything have been regarded as an advantage. He clearly preferred the high genre of history over the low genre of portraiture. But, 350 years later, that can present us with a challenge in determining whether a painting is a portrait historié or simply a pure allegory. Sometimes, as with the Pancras children, we may have an undisputed portrait of a sitter with which to confirm an identification.⁹ In other instances, family tradition, backed up by extensive archival research, may establish a convincing case.

In 2001, Glasgow Museums acquired Gerard de Lairesse’s Allegory of the Senses, signed and dated 1668 (fig. 3).¹⁰ It is one of only three paintings by the artist in a UK public collection.¹¹ The intention of this article is to explore and explain the iconography and provenance of the Glasgow painting more accurately and thoroughly than has been attempted hitherto and thereby better place it within Lairesse’s oeuvre.

Lairesse and the Tradition of the Five Senses

In the Glasgow Allegory, the Five Senses are represented primarily by the attributes held or associated with each of the five foreground figures. As Lairesse himself later wrote in his Groot Schilderboek (The Great Book on Painting): “An allegory exists completely of obscure matters, which common people cannot understand without an additional explanation. The figures do not show their true selves, taking on a different semblance. Therefore it is essential to depict these figures without any ambiguity, lest they are misunderstood and censured by wise men.”¹²

Touch is represented by the woman in golden brown on the left, whose right hand is being pecked by a green parrot. Taste is symbolized by the piece of fruit, perhaps a peach, held by the other woman, in dark green. Hearing is alluded to by the triangle sounded by the boy on the left. Smell is indicated by the spray of flowers held by the central girl. Sight appears in the shape of the elaborately framed convex mirror, which reflects the pointing hand of the small boy on the right. Secondary symbols of the Senses are provided by the fruit and nut-nibbling monkey (Taste), the prominent vase of flowers (Smell), musical instruments and myrtle (Hearing—myrtle oil helps clear the ears), tiny snail (Touch—since snails retract when touched), and, perhaps, the partially uncovered classical reliefs of the stone altar, which may suggest Sight.

The symbolism ultimately derives from Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia. First published in Rome in 1593, with an illustrated edition appearing in 1603, Ripa’s hugely influential treatise underwent six more Italian editions by 1645. During his upbringing and training in Liège, Lairesse could have come across the first French editions of 1636 and 1644, but in fact we have his own testimony that “when my [eldest] brother returned from Italy with Cesare Ripa’s book [it had] that until then . . . been unknown to us,”¹³ suggesting it was probably a recent Italian edition or reprint that he saw at this time. This rekindling of what he called his “smouldering inclination” toward allegorical subjects must have been as late as 1664, just four years before the date of the Glasgow allegory. As Lairesse also wrote, “Without any doubt, Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia is a laudable, excellent and useful book for all artists whose work has its roots in the art of painting.”¹⁴

Lairesse has, however, adapted Ripa’s prescribed symbolism to effect a composition of the Five Senses that is less cluttered with large animals and perhaps more plausible than is suggested in Iconologia. Thus, instead of the clawing falcon and tortoise of Ripa’s Touch, Lairesse introduces a pecking parrot and a snail; Ripa’s secondary symbols of an ermine and a hedgehog are nowhere to be seen. Taste here holds a single fruit rather than a basketful, though there is a platter nearby. Similarly, Hearing has lost its stag (an animal celebrated for that particular sense), and a triangle replaces what would have been an unwieldy lute for the infant personification. Smell and Sight have attributes closer to those of their models, although again devoid of their animal companions of vulture and lynx, respectively. The net result is a lucid composition, the clear colors and forms set against a backdrop of sharp-edged classical architecture, all in accordance with the tenets of mid–seventeenth-century European classicism.

Artists, especially of the Netherlandish School, had treated the subject of the Five Senses long before Ripa published his Iconologia, which drew upon some of the same sources as those earlier artists. The portrayal of the senses in the visual arts began in the sixteenth century, initially limited to print series. The standard formula was introduced in the 1561 series by Cornelis Cort after designs by Frans Floris, in which Hearing is close to the personification depicted by Jacques de Bie in the 1643/44 French edition of Ripa (fig. 4).¹⁵ The much-copied Saenredam-Goltzius series of about 1595/96 is altogether more adventurous, with an overtly romantic, even sexual character, featuring entwined couples in contemporary costume and sometimes only the token inclusion of traditional symbolism.¹⁶

Also quite common in both the Northern and Southern Netherlands during the mid-seventeenth century were sets of five small paintings, each work representing one of the Senses. These were often aimed at a less sophisticated middle market, and the elegant iconography derived from classical sources was pushed aside in favor of altogether more rudimentary symbolism. A typically crude example is provided by the representation of Smell by the Haarlem artist Jan Miense Molenaer, featuring a toddler having his bottom wiped.¹⁷

Much rarer are depictions of the Five Senses within the expanse of a single painting. An interesting example closer in date to the Lairesse than the other works mentioned so far is Herman van Aldewereld’s painting of 1651, now in Schwerin (fig. 5).¹⁸ The composition, with its additive accumulation of details and cramped-up overlapping figures, is awkward compared to the elegance and clarity of the Lairesse, but, with the exception of the harp for Hearing, the attributes held by each figure are closely comparable. It is possible that Lairesse had first-hand familiarity with the painting by Van Aldewereld, an Amsterdam artist.

While an Allegory of the Five Senses is the ostensible subject of the Glasgow painting, there is a great deal more to unpack. The capuchin monkey, clasping a walnut to its mouth, is an attribute of Taste.¹⁹ But similar monkeys are also frequently found in the context of vanitas subjects, mocking the folly, avarice, and short-lived worldly pleasures of man.²⁰ Given the transience of the Senses, there may be a secondary meaning here.

More intriguing is the prominent figure of Cupid (fig. 6), carved from immutable and flawless marble or stone and placed on what would seem to be a marble altar. He presides over the right-hand side of the whole composition.

The sculpture is probably modeled on statuettes of putti made fashionable by the Flemish sculptor François Duquesnoy (1597–1643), especially his marble Cupid Carving His Bow of ca.1626 (now in Berlin), which was brought to Amsterdam in 1629 and was in the gardens of Princess Amalia van Solms’s palace in The Hague in the 1660s (fig. 7).²¹

Lairesse himself wrote, “François Duquesnoy’s children are excellent examples to be copied in paint. Nobody ever reached the same level of perfection.”²² He also wrote that “a painter who wants to elucidate his story with allegories, mostly makes use of some sculpture.”²³ In his monograph, Alain Roy suggested that the three children—perhaps he meant the central girl—were offering a kind of homage to the god, and indeed the eldest child does seem to be stepping toward Cupid and presenting him with her bunch of roses.

The Painting’s Provenance

We are fortunate that an inscription on the back of the Glasgow canvas introduces a further level of interpretation in respect to the children. Written in white-chalk capital letters are the words: “THE THREE / CHILDREN ARE / VAN RYN.” The implication of this inscription, apparently modern but presumably following family tradition, is that in addition to being allegorical personifications of three of the Senses, the three foreground children are portraits.²⁴ In what follows, I will examine whether this is indeed plausible and who these children may be, primarily through careful analysis of the painting’s provenance and archival research into the earliest owners.

Glasgow Museums acquired the painting in October 2001 from Richard d’Orville Pilkington Jackson (1921–2009). He had inherited it from his father, Charles, on the latter’s death in 1973. Charles d’Orville Pilkington Jackson (1887–1973) was a traditional figurative sculptor based in Edinburgh who enjoyed a long and successful career and is probably best known today for his Robert the Bruce monument at Bannockburn (1964).²⁵ He had in turn inherited the Lairesse from his mother’s uncle, the minor marine and portrait artist Hely Augustus Smith (1862–1941), to whom it had passed from his father, the Reverend Hely Smith. This Reverend Smith had married one Harriet Morton, the daughter and heir of Joseph Morton, who himself had married Elizabeth d’Orville (?1782–1883). She was the last in the line of d’Orvilles through whom Richard Pilkington Jackson believed the Lairesse Allegory had traveled directly down the generations. He understood the first owner of the painting to have been a Jean d’Orville (1626–1694).²⁶

Roy had traced the provenance back to Jacques-Philippe d’Orville (1696–1751) (fig. 8), and this, indeed, proved to be the furthest back in the d’Orville family that the painting could be documented.²⁷ Jacques-Philippe, of French Huguenot descent, was one of the greatest scholars of his day in Europe.²⁸ The son and brother of wealthy merchants, he traveled frequently and widely in the 1710s and 1720s, meeting and corresponding with leading contemporary scholars and collectors of antiquities, including Linnaeus and Montfaucon. In the 1730s, he was established as a famous “Professor of History, Eloquence and Greek” at the Athenaeum Illustre in Amsterdam before eventually retiring to his estate at Groenendaal, near Haarlem, where he died in 1751.²⁹

It was also known by Richard Pilkington Jackson that Jacques-Philippe’s son, Johannes (1734–1799), a merchant, came to England and established his family at Ravenscourt Park in Hammersmith, London (fig. 9). Johannes, or John, was naturalized in England in 1763 and purchased Ravenscourt in 1765.³⁰ He must have brought the Lairesse to London at this time, and, because it would have been shipped unframed and rolled up, it now has an English pierced and gilt frame of the 1760s. Interestingly, the style is one traditionally associated with Huguenot framers, so it was perhaps made by a craftsman from within the Dutch community in London.

From d’Orville to Van Rijn

But what of the “Van Ryn” children? Jacques-Philippe d’Orville married Elisabeth Maria van Rijn (1711–1737) in 1732.³¹ Among the records of the Montias Database at the Frick Collection is an inventory, dated April 2, 1676, of an insolvent Pieter van Rhijn (1633–1712), who was the grandfather of Elisabeth Maria van Rijn and also a “master auctioneer for ship’s equipment of the Admiralty” [of Amsterdam] (but see below).³² Item 23 of the inventory list of twenty-eight paintings was “een schilderije uijtbeeldende de vijff sinnen met een blompot” (a painting representing the five senses with a vase of flowers). Although the painting is anonymous (and also unassessed), there are no others known to me that combine these two elements, so it seems very plausible that this Pieter van Rijn was the owner, and perhaps the patron, of the Glasgow Lairesse. The rest of his collection listed on the insolvency inventory included four sea pieces by Jan Blanckerhoff (eight to ten guilders each), a large copy after Jan Miense Molenaer (fifteen guilders), and various anonymous portraits, landscapes, still lifes, and genre scenes, valued modestly at between three and ten guilders each.³³ Maybe he had fallen on hard times following the disastrous rampjaar of 1672 that saw the ruin of the Dutch economy and so many individual lives in that year, as well as a significant slump in the art market.

Further research has revealed that Pieter van Rijn was born in January 1633 and baptized in the Oude Kerk in Amsterdam. He was initially a merchant in the family firm of Reael, Thierry, and Van Rijn (later Van Rijn and Van Goor), then auctioneer of the ships and goods at Amsterdam and bookkeeper in the clearing office (and, from 1699, the first librarian) not of the Admiralty, but of the Dutch East India Company (VOC).³⁴ He was also a Regent of the Rasp- en Tuchthuis (prison for young male criminals) in 1669. He died in May 1712.

Marten Jan Bok has kindly and brilliantly provided an extensive and conclusive genealogy for Pieter van Rijn and his children, and I am greatly indebted to him for discovering and sharing with me the crucial and conclusive information that follows in this section.³⁵

Pieter’s paternal grandparents were Jacob Egbertsz. van Rijn (1556–1619) and Maria Claes Gaeff (1549–1633); their portraits by Cornelis Ketel are in a private collection.³⁶ This couple’s only daughter, Griete (1585–1652), married Jacob van Neck (1564–1638), a member of the Vroedschap (Amsterdam City Council, 1621–38), a four-time burgomaster (1622–26), the admiral of the spice-trade fleet that sailed to the East Indies in 1598, and the owner of a large collection of pictures.³⁷

But it is the younger of her two brothers, Pieter Jacobsz. van Rijn (1579–1639), who is of greater significance to us, as the father of Pieter. Pieter Jacobsz. was a cloth and silk merchant dealing in caffa, damask, and other expensive fabrics. He was a Regent of the Huiszittenhuis and served as Lieutenant in the militia company (Crossbow Civic Guard) of Captain Jacob Hooghkamer, painted by Jacob Lyon (1586/7–1648/51) in 1628 (fig. 10).³⁸ He married no less than five times between the ages of about 20 and 53. By his third wife, he had six children, the eldest of whom had a daughter who married the artist Philips Koninck (Pieter the elder owned an example of his work).³⁹By Pieter Jacobsz.’s fourth wife, Weyntge van Foreest (d. before 1637), whom he married in 1632, he had two further children, of whom the eldest was Pieter van Rijn.

In 1657, Pieter van Rijn married Elisabeth Bessels (1634–1708), who later became a Regentess of the Almoner’s Orphanage in Amsterdam. She was the daughter of Adam Bessels (1585–1644), a pharmacist and merchant in the Levant who along with some of his other children became mixed up in the tulip market, and whose portrait in Muscovite costume was painted posthumously in about 1670.⁴⁰ Elisabeth’s mother was Margaretha Reynst (1598–1652), the daughter of Gerrit Reynst, one of the seventeen directors of the Dutch East India Company and the second governor-general of the Dutch East Indies, and sister to the very wealthy merchants Gerard (1599–1658) and Jan Reynst (1601–1646). Between them, the brothers assembled the greatest private collection of sixteenth-century Italian and seventeenth-century Dutch paintings and classical sculpture in Golden Age Holland. The cream of it was purchased from Gerard’s widow to form the celebrated “Dutch Gift” from the States of Holland and West Friesland to Charles II after his restoration in 1660.⁴¹ Lairesse famously etched the frontispiece of the influential volume of 110 prints after drawings of the sculpture collection, entitled Collectorum Signorum veterum Icones (1671) (fig. 11).⁴²

Pieter van Rijn, for whom sadly we have no portrait, lived on the Keizersgracht next to “de Stadt Gent” and opposite the brewery “de Croon” in 1661,⁴³on the Keizersgracht near the Arminian [Remonstrant] Church in 1663,⁴⁴ on Oudezijds Achterburgwal in “de Witte Leelij” near the Walloon Church in 1665,⁴⁵ and on the Keizersgracht near Leidsestraat in 1674.⁴⁶ At the end of his life (1708) he lived at no. 505 Herengracht near the Vijzelstraat (fig. 12), a property that descended through his family after his death until it was finally sold by Johannes d’Orville in 1760, shortly before he moved to London.

The most important facts discovered by Bok concern Pieter and Elisabeth’s ten children, born between August 1658 and August 1674. By 1668, four had died in infancy,⁴⁷ but three were still alive: their second daughter, Margrieta, who was baptized in August 1659 (buried in July 1674, aged fourteen); their second son, also called Pieter, who was baptized in April 1666 (buried in January 1726, aged fifty-nine); and their third son, Adam, who was baptized in October 1667 (died in May 1741, aged seventy-three). Born after the date of the painting were their fifth and sixth daughters, Waintje (or Wendela, 1669–1746) and Clara Maria (1672–1728), and their fourth son, Jacobus (baptized in August 1674, buried in March 1676).⁴⁸

In 1668, Margrieta would have been about eight or nine years old; Pieter (the younger), about two; and Adam, about twelve months. There can be little doubt that these are the three Van Rijn children in Gerard de Lairesse’s Allegory of the Five Senses in Glasgow (fig. 13).

In 1709, Pieter van Rijn the younger would marry his cousin Clara Maria van Wachtendonck (ca.1680/85–1720), daughter of an Agent of the States-General at Aachen (and granddaughter of Anna Bessels, sister to Elisabeth); they would produce two children: a son who died at age six and Elisabeth Maria, who married Jacques-Philippe d’Orville. Margrieta, sadly, died at age fourteen, just six years after the painting was made. Adam outlived them both, serving as a commissioner of the Bank of Amsterdam between 1714 and 1727. Poignantly, the four children who had died young are represented in the painting by the four putti shown playing above and below the River God fountain, itself a symbol of the passage of time, at the extreme left edge of the composition (fig. 14).

The Glasgow Painting Reconsidered

In this context, the function of Cupid may take on a more profound meaning. As Lairesse wrote: “everything originates from [Cupid] as the poets assure us.” Considering how the first peoples after the Great Flood sought some means to escape from death and immortalize their race, he asked, “Which god is more qualified in this matter to exert his influence and offer help than Cupid? Is not even Jupiter subject to his reign?”⁴⁹ So while the marble Cupid here may not symbolize divine love,⁵⁰ he surely stands for a love that is solid and enduring, in contrast to the transient Senses and, all too often, to the short lives of children.

In addition, the prominence of the flowers in the vase may have significance beyond their primary function of symbolizing transience and Smell by emblematizing fertility and the blossoming of youth. They appear to include varieties of rose, peony, lily, jasmine, astragalus, and viburnum, all sweet-smelling flowers that need to be carefully cultivated in a garden, perhaps an allusion to the nurturing of children in a similarly controlled domestic context. Evidently to that end, Lairesse took great care to ensure that each specific flower was clearly distinct and identifiable, albeit arguably at the expense of creating a well-balanced and realistic floral arrangement.⁵¹ The selection, disposition, and chromatic range also seem to accord with the rules he would set out in his Groot Schilderboek.⁵²

Most significantly, the Glasgow painting now has a secure and unbroken provenance back to its presumed first commission by Pieter van Rijn (the elder) in 1668, which is rare for a Dutch seventeenth-century painting outside royal or aristocratic hands. Pieter is recorded as living successively in four different properties in Amsterdam between 1661 and his insolvency in 1676. This may indicate that he was renting rather owning them, which would in turn imply that the Glasgow painting was not made to be hung in a specific home.⁵³ If, on the other hand, he had by 1668 bought or built the house on the Keizersgracht that he occupied in 1674, the painting could reasonably have been commissioned for it. In that scenario, and given its particular format, it is most likely to have been intended as a grand “Schoorsteen-stuk.”⁵⁴

At Pieter’s insolvency in 1676, his sisters-in-law, Constantia and Maria Bessels, salvaged some of the furniture and paintings from his estate before they could be sold publicly to pay off creditors.⁵⁵ The family portraits, including the Glasgow painting, were no doubt among the items retained, and they were presumably then returned to Pieter. Another sister-in-law, Clara Bessels (1632–1697), left the house at no. 505 Herengracht (built 1683) to Pieter van Rijn the elder’s children—most likely so that his creditors couldn’t acquire it—for this was Pieter the elder’s address in 1708, and he may have lived there, with Clara and her husband, for several years before that. If so, the Glasgow Lairesse may have hung for many years in this property, which was inherited in 1746 by Johannes d’Orville from his great-aunt Wendelina (1669–1746), the last of the Van Rijns. Indeed it probably remained there until John finally took it to England in the 1760s.

At this point it is also worth considering a little-known painting by Lairesse in Havana, of identical dimensions to the Glasgow Allegory, for which Roy proposed a similar date and which could be its pendant (fig. 15).⁵⁶ This painting is ostensibly an Allegory of Spring, but Roy is surely correct to interpret it as a rather more complex vanitas subject on the theme of love. There are parallels in the architectural backdrop, the binary composition, the central woman (who is apparently the same model as in the Glasgow painting), and, above all, the possibility that the three children (aged about two to six) on the right are portraits, while the six on the left, near symbols of death, represent deceased infants. However, the scale of the principal figures does not match up, making these unlikely pendants, and as yet no link has been found to Pieter van Rijn the elder’s immediate family.⁵⁷ If there is a connection to him and the Glasgow painting, it is yet to be explained.

Some further questions remain. Firstly, why did Pieter van Rijn choose Lairesse to portray his children? Few, if any, portraits by him are known to predate the Glasgow picture,⁵⁸ so his reputation in this sphere must have been limited. Part of the explanation must lie in the fact that in 1668, the date of the painting, and since 1665, Pieter’s address on the Oudezijds Achterburgwal (now nos. 157–167) was close to the Walloon Church, of which the Liégeois Lairesse had also been a member since 1665;⁵⁹ it was also close to the artist’s own home on the Nieuwmarkt.⁶⁰ In addition, the prominent dealer Gerrit Uylenburgh (ca.1625–1679), for whom Lairesse worked briefly upon his arrival in Amsterdam, is said to have praised and showed the artist’s work to connoisseurs. Perhaps Pieter was among them, since Uylenburgh certainly knew his aunt, Anna Reynst, the widow of the great collector Gerard Reynst, for whom Lairesse made an engraved title page in ca.1670, again drawing from Ripa.⁶¹ Also, by 1668 Lairesse had met and indeed made engravings for the dramatic poet Andries Pels, who would help found the art/literary society Nil Volentibus Arduum in the following year. This society consisted largely of “influential citizens and intellectually ambitious members of the ruling families,”⁶²and Lairesse’s association with such people—who may have included Pieter van Rijn—naturally assisted with the rapid advance of his social position.

Lairesse’s clear, idealizing style drew on both the Poussinian classicism of his master, Bertholet Flémal (and, via print reproductions, of Poussin himself), and the native Dutch tradition of classicism that had become especially popular in court circles and among the wealthy elite from the 1650s. Called indeed the “Dutch Poussin,” acclaimed as the “New Apelles” by Willem III, and sometimes even compared with Raphael, Lairesse would go on to produce many large-format history paintings and allegories. By the 1670s, he had become one of the most popular artists in the Dutch Republic, painting several overmantels or cycles of paintings to decorate the interiors of the houses of wealthy Amsterdam merchants and regents. It was therefore probably more his skills and ambitions as a history painter than as a portraitist that first won him the attention of Pieter van Rijn.

Liedtke’s comments on the Apollo and Aurora in New York apply equally to the Glasgow Allegory: such paintings “clearly demonstrate why Lairesse was so successful in Amsterdam. Combining classical subjects, contemporary relevance, idealized portraiture, and the latest pictorial style, he gave sophisticated patrons pictures that are masterfully composed and painted, and—despite their show of learning—more accessible than the great majority of works in this vein.”⁶³

Presumably patron and artist discussed the particular iconography of the Glasgow Allegory of the Senses, for which there are few precedents as a subject for child portraiture.⁶⁴ One factor may have been that some of the primary attributes of the Senses could suitably and plausibly be held by young children, and indeed there is an appropriate charm in them doing so. But of overriding significance, no doubt, was the overall message of the painting: the enduring power of eternal love over fleeting senses and life itself.

Appendix

Endnotes

1. Alain Roy, Gérard de Lairesse, 1640–1711 (Paris: Arthena, 1992), 242, no. P. 63; J. Beltman et al., eds., Eindelijk! De Lairesse: Klassieke schoonheid in de Gouden Eeuw, exh. cat. (Enschede: Rijksmuseum Twenthe/Zwolle: Waanders, 2016), 96.
2. Walter Liedtke, Dutch Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art/New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 415–21, no.104; Beltman et al., Eindelijk!, 23.
3. Roy, Lairesse, 245–46, no. P. 67.
4. The features of Apollo match those of a portrait of Gerbrand by Gerard ter Borch of 1670 (Manchester City Art Gallery; reproduced in Liedtke, Dutch Paintings, 416, fig. 104), while a painting by De Lairesse of Apollo and Aurora appeared in the sale of Gerbrand’s estate in 1716 and in that of Maria’s son in 1752.
5. Gerard de Lairesse, The Art of Painting, trans. John Frederick Fritsch (London, 1738), book 7, chap.1, 263–64. See also the thorough discussion of De Lairesse’s theory and approach to portraiture in Tijana Žakula, “Striking a Pose: The Portrait between Likeness and Ideal,” Simiolus 37, 2013–14, Reforming Dutch Art: Gerard de Lairesse on Beauty, Morals and Class (2015): 88–109. See also Claus Kemmer, “In Search of Classical Form: Gerard de Lairesse’s Groot childerboek and Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting,” Simiolus 26, nos. 1–2 (1998): 109. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.2307/3780872
6. For De Lairesse and the debate between the antique and modern modes, see Žakula, “Striking a Pose,” esp. 33–59, 88–109.
7. Žakula, “Striking a Pose,” 103.
8. Žakula, “Striking a Pose,” 107. For portraits historiés and the Dutch tradition, see Rose Wishnevsky, “Studien zum ‘portrait historié’ in den Nederlanden” (PhD diss., University of Munich, 1965); A. Bauer, Begrifflichkeit und Typus des Portrait historié im holländischen 17. Jahrhundert, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1996); Marieke de Winkel, “Rollenspel,” in Kopstukken: Amsterdammers geportretteerd 1600–1800, ed. Norbert Middelkoop, exh. cat. (Amsterdam: Amsterdam Historisch Museum/Bussum: Thoth, 2002), 96–97.
9. This can work both ways: the identification of the principal female figure in an allegory of 1671, now in the Musée de Picardie, Amiens, as Duchess Marie of Cleves, the daughter of Frederick-Hendrick, Prince of Orange, has recently been rejected by comparison with securely documented portraits of her. It is now entitled Lof op de Vrede (“In Praise of Peace”). See Roy, Lairesse, 244–45, no. P. 66; Beltman et al., Eindelijk!, 92–97, no. C86.
10. Purchased for £220,000 with the assistance of the Heritage Lottery Fund, the National Art Collections Fund (Art Fund) and the Trustees of the Hamilton Bequest. It had been on loan from the vendor to the city’s main museum at Kelvingrove since 1983. See Roy, Lairesse, 69, 158, 226–27, no. P. 44. See also: Flemish Art, 1300–1700, exh. cat. (London: Royal Academy, 1953), 105, no. 369 (lent by Charles d’Orville Pilkington Jackson, Edinburgh); Sylvia Ferino-Pagden, Immagini del sentire. I cinque sensu nell’arte, exh. cat. (Cremona: S. Maria della Pietà/Madrid: Museo del Prado/Milan, 1996), 270–71, no. 40; Rosemary Watt, “Gerard de Lairesse (1640–1711), The Five Senses,” National Art Collections Fund 2001 Review 49, no. 4906 (2002); Robert Wenley, “Masterpieces of a Merchant City,” Apollo 159 (2006): 48, fig.11; Beltman, Eindelijk!, 165, no. C85.
11. See also his The Anointing of Solomon, ?1668 (Bradford, Cartwright Hall Art Gallery); see François Marandet, “‘The Anointing of Solomon’ by Gerard de Lairesse Discovered in the Cartwright Hall Art Gallery, Bradford,” Burlington Magazine 148 (February 2016): 101–02. The Jacob and Rachel at the Well, ?1660s (Kilmarnock, Dick Institute), is also firmly attributed to De Lairesse by Christopher Wright in Images of a Golden Age, ed. Richard Lockett, exh. cat. (Birmingham: Birmingham City Museums, 1989), 194, no. 142; and by Georgia Toutziari in her entry on the VADS NICE Paintings database, accessed February 6, 2019, HTTPS://VADS.AC.UK/LARGE.PHP?UID=87505; although it does not appear in Alain Roy’s monograph.
12. Gerard de Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, trans. Lyckle de Vries, CD supplement to Lyckle de Vries, How to Create Beauty: De Lairesse on the Theory and Practice of Making Art (Leiden: Primavera Press, 2011), book 2, chap. 11, 96.
13. See De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 2, chap. 11, 94. This brother must have been Ernest de Lairesse (1636–1675/76), who was in Rome from 1662 to 1664, the year that Gerard left Liège for the Dutch Republic (I am most grateful to Marten Jan Bok for this information).
14. De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 2, chap. 11, 93.
15. Manfred Sellink, Cornelis Cort, ed. Huigen Leeflang (New Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish), 3 vols. (Rotterdam: Sound & Vision, 2000), 3:108–15, nos. 204–08. Cesare Ripa, “Les Cincq Sens de Nature: L’Ouie” in Iconologia (Paris: Jean Baudoin/ Gallimet, 1643/44), 2:49. See also Schipper, “Mit Lust unter den Händen,” 1:23–31, and 2: no.113 and figs. 46–50.
16. F. W. H. Hollstein, Goltzius-Heemskerck, in Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish, vol. 8 (Amsterdam: Hertzberger, 1953), 136, nos. 380–84; G. S. Keyes, Saenredam–R. Savery, ed. K. G. Boon, in Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish, vol. 23 (Amsterdam: Hertzberger, 1980), 76–78, nos. 101–5. See also Schipper, “Mit Lust unter den Händen,” 1:109–15, and 2:389–91, no. 139, figs. 61–62; also Ilja Veldman, “Goltzius’ Zintuigen, Seizoenen, Elementen, Planeten en Vier tijden van de dag,” in Goltzius-studies: Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617), ed. R. Falkenburg et al, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 42–43, 1991–92 (1993): 310–12, figs. 204–08 HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/22145966-90000623; and Ilja Veldman, “Van allegorie naar genre in de Nederlandse prentkunst,” in De Boekenwereld 2 (1994–95): 66–68.
17. 1637, The Hague, Mauritshuis. See Ariane van Suchtelen and Quentin Buvelot, Genre Paintings in the Mauritshuis (The Hague: Mauritshuis/Zwolle: Waanders, 2016), 168–74.
18. For Van Aldewereld, see RKD Explore online database entry, accessed February 6, 2019, HTTPS://RKD.NL/EXPLORE/ARTISTS/1011.
19. A chained monkey, holding a fruit or nut to its mouth, appears in Cort’s engraving of Taste (see note 17 above).
20. For monkeys in art, see H. W. Janson, Apes and Ape Lore, in the Middle Ages and in the Renaissance, Studies of the Warburg Institute, ed. H. Frankfort, vol. 20 (London: Warburg Institute, 1952), esp. 239, 308–10; Margaret Sullivan, “Peter Bruegel the Elder’s Two Monkeys: A New Interpretation,” The Art Bulletin 63, no.1 (March 1981): 114–26 HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.2307/3050090; Ariane van Suchtelen, “Hendrick ter Brugghen’s Bacchante with an Ape: The Painter’s Working Method and Theme,” The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 19 (1991): 35–41; Ptolemy Tompkins, The Monkey in Art (London: Scala, 1994), esp. 46–49. The association by classical authors of nuts (as held by the monkey) with avarice is discussed by Sullivan, “Two Monkeys,” 121.
21. See Marion Boudon-Machuel, François du Quesnoy 1597–1643 (Paris: Arthena, 2005), 79, 273, no. Œ 62, fig. 77.
22. De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 2, chap. 6, 59.
23. De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 2, chap. 11, 97.
24. The painting has been relined; this may conceal an earlier inscription, or an identifying label may have been removed.
25. See his entry in the Mapping Sculpture online database: Kirsty Jackson, “Charles D’Orville Pilkington Jackson ARSA, FRBS, ARBA,” Mapping the Practice and Profession of Sculpture in Britain and Ireland 1851–1951, University of Glasgow History of Art and HATII, online database 2011, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://SCULPTURE.GLA.AC.UK/VIEW/PERSON.PHP?ID=MSIB6_1211212410.
26. Information from the late Richard Pilkington Jackson, faxed letter to Rosemary Watt, Glasgow Museums, October 5, 2000. Unfortunately, as he confirmed in a letter to the author of November 28, 2004, he had no family papers to support this. He also had no other works of art or knowledge of works of art from the d’Orvilles.
27. Roy, Lairesse, 226. The 1953 Royal Academy Flemish Art exhibition catalogue entry for this painting (see note 11 above), records the provenance as “Jacobus d’Orville, 1730.”
28. Ferdinand Hoefer, ed., Nouvelle Biographie Générale, (Paris: Firmin Didot Frères, 1862), 38:892–93; and P. J. Blok and P. C. Molhuysen, eds., Nieuw Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek (hereafter NNBW) (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1918), vol. 4, cols. 1043–44 (see HTTPS://WWW.DBNL.ORG/TEKST/MOLH003NIEU04_01/MOLH003NIEU04_01_1605.PHP, accessed February 7, 2019). See also the French- and German-language Wikipedia entries, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://FR.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/JACQUES_PHILIPPE_D%27ORVILLE and HTTPS://DE.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/JACQUES_PHILIPPE_D%E2%80%99ORVILLE.
29. Jacques-Philippe published several important books, although his most notable, Sicula, on the ancient history of Sicily, appeared posthumously in 1762/64, accompanied by Houbraken’s engraving of his portrait. He also acquired a remarkable collection of medieval and later books and manuscripts, relating in particular to Theocritus and the Greek Anthology. While the books were sold by his son in 1764 and are now dispersed, the manuscripts (more than 500 in number), correspondence, and some family papers passed to a grandson before eventual purchase by the Bodleian Library in 1804. See “MSS. D’Orville,” Bodleian Library website, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://WWW.BODLEY.OX.AC.UK/DEPT/SCWMSS/WMSS/MEDIEVAL/MSS/DORVILLE.HTM. The engaging original oil portrait of him by Quinkhard entered the Bodleian as recently as 1989, the gift of Mrs R. G. Macbeth. See R. L. Poole, revised and expanded by Kenneth Garlick, Catalogue of Portraits in the Bodleian Library (Oxford: Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, 2004), 104. Reproduced in color on the Art UK online database, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://ARTUK.ORG/DISCOVER/ARTWORKS/JACQUES-PHILIPPE-DORVILLE-16961751-228635.
30. “An Act for Naturalizing John D’Orville,” February 6, 1762/63, Hammersmith Archives, doc. no. DD/67/6; “Articles relating to the Purchase of Ravenscourt,” May 24, 1764, Hammersmith Archives, doc. no. DD/67/45. The latter is an agreement between Henry Dagge and John Dorville for Dorville to purchase Ravenscourt and its contents for £5000 “before the said thirty first day of December next ensuing.” In the end, the sale was concluded only in February 1765. See James Bird and Philip Norman, eds., London County Council Survey of London, vol. 6, The Parish of Hammersmith (London: London County Council, 1915), 113. On February 8, 1765, Henry Dagge sold to John Dorville, of Soho Square, “all that messuage or manor house, now commonly called . . . Ravenscourt” (also published on the British History Online website, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.BRITISH-HISTORY.AC.UK/SURVEY-LONDON/VOL6/PP98-113). De Lairesse’s Allegory was presumably displayed at Ravenscourt between 1765 and 1812, when John’s son, also called John, a city merchant, sold the house and estate for £15,000. It was probably this John who lost the family fortune in running up huge gambling debts, but the Lairesse passed safely to his daughter, Elizabeth, the last of the d’Orvilles. Ravenscourt was destroyed by incendiary bombs in 1941, and the local paper reported that Elizabeth’s grandson, the artist Hely Smith, died of shock on seeing the library of her old residence in flames. See also Rosamund Vercoe, Ravenscourt (London: Fulham and Hammersmith Historical Society, 1991), 28–29.
31. Blok and Molhuysen, NNBW, 1844, gives the date as 1730; the entry for Jacques-Philippe d’Orville in Abraham van der Aa, Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden (Haarlem: J.J. van Brederode, 1867), 14:213–16, has 1732 (published on the DBNL website, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.DBNL.ORG/TEKST/AA__001BIOG17_01/AA__001BIOG17_01_0406.PHP). The Van der Aa reference was kindly first provided to the author by the late Walter Liedtke in an email of October 24, 2009.
32. Inventory no. 1365, online Montias Database of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Art Inventories, the Frick Collection Library (hereafter Montias database), accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://RESEARCH.FRICK.ORG/MONTIAS/BROWSERECORD.PHP?-ACTION=BROWSE&-RECID=3772.
33. None has been traced; however, A Mountainous Landscape by an imitator of Hercules Segers, in the National Gallery, London (NG4383) bears the brand “C. van Rijn,” with a P cut later over the C; conceivably this is the mark of Pieter van Rijn. See N. MacLaren, rev. Christopher Brown, Catalogue of the Dutch School (London: National Gallery, 1991), 1:420, vol. 2, pl. 344.
34. J. C. M. Pennings, “Archival Management by the VOC (1602–1795),” History of the Arrangement of the VOC Archives, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://WWW.TANAP.NET/CONTENT/VOC/HISTORY/HISTORY_MANAGEVOC.HTM. I am most grateful to Remmelt Daalder, then senior curator picturalia at the Nederlands Scheepvaartmuseum Amsterdam, for kindly checking and communicating the text of Montias’s original source (which Montias had mistranslated): De Neederlandsche Leeuw 50 (1932): col. 139, in which Pieter the elder is described as being the “vendumeester van de schepen en koopmanschappen te Amsterdam” (email of May 11, 2010).  
35. Email exchanges between Marten Jan Bok and the author, May 2010. Information from Johan E. Elias, De vroedschap van Amsterdam 1578–1795 (Haarlem: Vincent Loosjes, 1903–5; repr. Amsterdam: N. Israel, 1963), 1:269–70; O. Schutte, Repertorium der Nederlandse vertegenwoordigers residerende in het buitenland, 1584–1610 (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1976), 189; and online resources from the Amsterdam and Rotterdam city archives (Stadsarchief). Information taken from the Amsterdam baptismal, marriage, and burial records (Doop-, Trouw-, en Begraafregisters) hereafter referred to as SAA, DTB.
36. Each dated 1590; see RKD Explore nos. 146002 and 126074, respectively (HTTPS://RKD.NL/EXPLORE/IMAGES/146002 and HTTPS://RKD.NL/EXPLORE/IMAGES/126074, accessed February 8, 2019).
37. For Griete and Jacob van Rijn, see the entry for the former in the Montias database, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://RESEARCH.FRICK.ORG/MONTIAS/BROWSERECORD.PHP?-ACTION=BROWSE&-RECID=2501.
38. Amsterdam Museum; see D. C. Meijer Jr., “De Amsterdamche Schutters-Stukken in en Buiten het Nieuwe Rijksmuseum,” Oud Holland 3 (1885): 119 HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/187501785×00305, and D. C. Meijer Jr., trans. Tom van der Molen, “The Amsterdam Civic Guard Portraits Within and Outside the New Rijksmuseum Part I,” Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5:1 (Winter 2013), paragraphs 34–38, HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5092/JHNA.2013.5.1.4 
39. See Abraham Bredius, Künstler-Inventare: Urkunden zur Geschichte der Holländischen Kunst des XVIten, XVIIten und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1915–22), 1:149–69.
40. Dutch School; Amsterdam Museum (SA 1530); stolen 1978. For the Bessels family, see: NN., “Het geslacht Bessel, Van Bessel, Bessels,” Algemeen Nederlandsch Familieblad no. 81 (1884): 1–2; also J. D. Uhlenbeck, “Het Amsterdamsche geslacht Bessels,” De Nederlandsche Leeuw 50 (1932): cols. 136–40; available online via the Koninklijk Nederlandsche Geenotschap voor Geslacht- en Wapenkunde website, accessed February 8, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.KNGGW.NL/RAADPLEGEN/DE-NEDERLANDSCHE-LEEUW/1932-50/78, 139.
41. See Denis Mahon, “Notes on the ‘Dutch Gift’ to Charles II,” Burlington Magazine 91 (November 1949), 303–05; (December 1949), 349–50; 92 (January 1950), 12–18; Anne-Marie Logan, The “Cabinet” of the Brothers Gerard and Jan Reynst (Amsterdam, Oxford, and New York: North Holland Publishing Company, 1979); Anna Reynolds, essay and entries in Martin Clayton and Rufus Bird, eds., Charles II: Art and Power, exh. cat. (London: Royal Collection Trust/University of Chicago Press, 2017), 16, 251–53, 272–83, nos. 123, and 133–38. The Reynst collection included paintings from the important collection formed by the Flemish merchant Lucas van Uffelen (1586–1638), who also brought to Holland Duquesnoy’s Cupid Carving his Bow (see note 23 above).
42. See Roy, Lairesse, 449–51, nos. G.66, D. 22; Beltman et al., Eindelijk!, 167, no. C93.  
43. SAA, DTB 1068, 93 (November 29, 1661).
44. SAA, DTB 1068, 144 (December 29, 1663); the Remonstrant Church is at no.102 the Keizersgracht.
45. SAA, DTB 1068, 204 (March 11, 1665); the Walloon Church is at nos. 157–167 Oudezijds Achterburgwal.
46. SAA, DTB 1068, 437 (July 21, 1674). At the death of his youngest son, Jacobus, in 1674 (see main text and note 54 below), the address was specified as “the fourth house from Liedsestraat” (see I. H. van Eeghen, “Het graf van Jan Sywertsz Kolm en Titus van Rijn,” Maandblad Amstelodamum 72 (1985), 98–105, esp. 103–4), which Marten Jan Bok has tentatively identified as no. 502 the Keizersgracht. This was apparently built in 1672 for the property agent Dirk Heere (see the online database of Amsterdam Canal Houses, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://WWW.AMSTERDAMSEGRACHTENHUIZEN.INFO/GRACHT/KGE/KGE600/KG16502).
47. Their first daughter, Wijntje, was baptized in August 1658 (SAA, DTB 105, 159) and buried in November 1661, aged three (SAA, DTB 1068, 93). Their third daughter, Anna Elisabeth, was baptized in December 1660 (SAA, DTB 43, 451) and buried in December 1663, aged three (SAA, DTB 1068, 144). Their first son, Pieter, was baptized in September 1663 (SAA, DTB 106, 73) and buried in December 1665, aged two (SAA, DTB 1068, 221). Their fourth daughter, Maria, was baptized in January 1665 (SAA, DTB 66, 47) and buried in March 1665, aged two months (SAA, DTB 1068, 204).
48. For their baptismal and burial or death records, respectively, see SAA, DTB 105, 209 and SAA, DTB 1068, 437 (Margrieta); SAA, DTB 66, 76 and SAA, DTB 1070, fol. 121v (Pieter); SAA, DTB 106, 264 and De la Fontaine Verwey et al., Herengracht, 320 (Adam); SAA, DTB 44, 232 and SAA, DTB 1058, fol. 132 (Waintje); SAA, DTB 107, 25 and De la Fontaine Verwey et al., Herengracht, 339 (Clara Maria); and SAA, DTB 107, 114 and SAA, DTB 1102, 46 (Jacobus).
49. De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 1, chap. 10, 89.
50. An idea dismissed by Paul Taylor, Warburg Institute, email to author of May 2010.
51. On De Lairesse’s ambition to elevate the “lower” genre of still life by investing such works with meaning, see Žakula, “Striking a pose,” 118.
52. See esp. De Lairesse, The Great Book on Painting, book 12, chap. 1.
53. This was the conclusion that Marten Jan Bok expressed to the author in an email of May 16, 2010. I am most grateful to him for this observation and for the other information and proposals in this paragraph.
54. I am most grateful to Eric Jan Sluijter for this suggestion (editorial comments, January 16, 2018).
55. 55. SAA, Archief van Commissarissen van de Desolate Boedelkamer (5072), 601, fol. 241–46, April 2, 1676.
56. Roy, Lairesse, 228–29, no. P. 45.
57. The provenance of the Havana painting is unknown before 1841, when it was one of thirty paintings donated to the Real Academia de Bellas Artes, Havana, by Pedro de Alcántara Téllez-Girón (1786–1851), Prince of Anglona, formerly Director of the Prado Museum (1820–1823) and Captain General of Cuba (1840–1841). See entries on this painting and another from the donation on the museum’s website (accessed February 8, 2019): HTTP://WWW.BELLASARTES.CO.CU/OBRA/GERARD-DE-LAIRESSE-LA-PRIMAVERA-DE-LA-VIDA-1668, HTTP://WWW.BELLASARTES.CO.CU/OBRA/JACOPO-DA-PONTE-BASSANO-SAN-CRISTOBAL.
58. One candidate, perhaps a portrait historié, is the Allegory of Marriage(?), Leith-Hay sale, Christie’s, London, April 29, 1949 (lot 57); Roy, Lairesse, 222, no. P. 35. Roy dates this to ca. 1667–70. For his portraits generally, see Patrick Larsen, “‘Onderwerpen aan alle de gebreken der Natuur’ De Lairesse als portret-schilder,” in Beltman et al., Eindelijk!, 90–96, which does not, however, consider the Glasgow painting.
59. I am grateful to Elmer Kolfin for this suggestion (email to the author, February 7, 2017).
60. I am grateful to Eric Jan Sluijter for this further observation (editorial comments, January 16, 2018).
61. Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Co.: Art and Commerce in Amsterdam 1625–1675, exh. cat. (London: Dulwich Picture Gallery; Amsterdam: The Rembrandt House Museum/Zwolle; Amsterdam: Waanders, 2006), 216–20 HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/18750176-13101002. This account derives in part from Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, 3 vols. (Amsterdam: Houbraken, 1718–21), 3:109–11. Gerrit Uylenburgh, with the sculptor Artus Quellinus, was responsible for selecting the works from the Reynst collection for the “Dutch Gift” in 1660; they were purchased from Gerard’s widow, Anna. See Logan, Gerard and Jan Reynst, 75; on De Lairesse’s title page, see 45–47.
62. Claus Kemmer, review of Roy, Lairesse, in Simiolus 23, nos. 2–3 (1995): 189.
63. Liedtke, Dutch Paintings, 419.
64. For two not unrelated portraits historiés of children, see Marieke Spliethoff, “Amor omnia vincit: De drie oudste kinderen van stadhouder Frederik Hendrik en Amalia van Solms op een groepsportret door Gerard van Honthorst, 1629,” in Charles Dumas, ed., Face Book: Studies on Dutch and Flemish Portraiture of the 16th–18th Centuries (Liber Amicorum presented to Rudolf E. O. Ekkart on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday) (Leiden: Primavera Pers; The Hague: RKD, 2012), 167–74. Schipper identifies just two other group portraits featuring children holding objects that symbolize the Five Senses, but both are conventional family group portraits, in which such attributes are secondary, essentially decorative motifs. The portraits are Jan Miense Molenaer’s Ruychaver-Van der Laan Family (Amsterdam, Museum Van Loon, Amsterdam) and Hendrick Cornelisz. van Vliet’s Family of Michiel van der Dussen, 1640 (Delft, Museum Het Prinsenhof). See Schipper, “Mit Lust unter den Händen,” 1:91–2, and 2:409, no. 202 (fig. no. 85); and 1:92–93, 2: 442, no. 308 (fig. no. 137), respectively. See also the unidentified family group, 1637, by the “Mongrammist S. E.” (Braunschweig, Herzog-Anton-Ulrich Museum); Schipper, “Mit Lust unter den Händen,” 2:427–28, no. 257, fig. 115.  

Bibliography

• Aa, Abraham van der. “Jacques-Philippe d’Orville” In Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, vol. 14, 213–16. Haarlem: J.J. van Brederode, 1867, published on the Digitale Bibliotheek voor de Nederlandse Letteren website (hereafter DBNL), accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.DBNL.ORG/TEKST/AA__001BIOG17_01/AA__001BIOG17_01_0406.PHP.
• “An Act for Naturalizing John D’Orville,” February 6, 1762/63, Hammersmith Archives, doc. no. DD/67/6.
• “Articles relating to the Purchase of Ravenscourt,” May 24, 1764, Hammersmith Archives, doc. no. DD/67/45.
• Bauer, A. “Begrifflichkeit und Typus des Portrait historié im holländischen 17. Jahrhundert,” 2 vols. Unpublished MA thesis, Freien Universität Berlin, 1996.
• Bird, James and Philip Norman, eds. London County Council Survey of London. Vol. 7, The Parish of Hammersmith. London: London County Council, 1915; published on the British History Online website, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.BRITISH-HISTORY.AC.UK/SURVEY-LONDON/VOL6/PP98-113.
• Blok, P. J. and P. C. Molhuysen, eds. Nieuw Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek, vol. 4. Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1918. Published on the DBNL website, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.DBNL.ORG/TEKST/MOLH003NIEU04_01/MOLH003NIEU04_01_1605.PHP.
• Beltman, J. et al., eds. Eindelijk! De Lairesse: Klassieke schoonheid in de Gouden Eeuw. Exh. cat. Enschede: Rijksmuseum Twenthe/Zwolle: Waanders, 2016.
• Bodleian Library website, ‘MSS. D’Orville,’ accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://WWW.BODLEY.OX.AC.UK/DEPT/SCWMSS/WMSS/MEDIEVAL/MSS/DORVILLE.HTM.
• Boudon-Machuel, Marion. François du Quesnoy 1597–1643. Paris: Arthena, 2005.
• Bredius, Abraham. Künstler-Inventare: Urkunden zur Geschichte der Holländischen Kunst des XVIten, XVIIten und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1915–22.
• Eeghen, I. H. van. “Het graf van Jan Sywertsz Kolm en Titus van Rijn.” Maandblad Amstelodamum 72 (1985): 98–105.
• Elias, Johan E. De vroedschap van Amsterdam 1578–1795. Haarlem: Vincent Loosjes, 1903–5; reprinted Amsterdam: N. Israel, 1963.
• Ferino-Pagden, Sylvia. Immagini del sentire. I cinque sensu nell’arte. Exh. cat. Cremona: S. Maria della Pietà/Madrid: Museo del Prado/Milan, 1996.
• Fontaine Verwey, H. de la et al. Vier eeuwen Herengracht. Amsterdam: Stadsdrukkerij Amsterdam/Genootschap Amstelodamum, 1976.
• Hoefer, Ferdinand, ed. Nouvelle Biographie Générale. Paris: Firmin Didot Frères, 1862.
• Hollstein, F. W. H. Goltzius-Heemskerck. In Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish, vol. 8. Amsterdam: M. Hertzberger, 1953.
• Houbraken, Arnold. De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen. 3 vols. Amsterdam: Houbraken, 1718–21.
• Inventory of Griete van Rijn (1585–1652), 1653, Montias Database of Seventeenth Century Dutch Art Inventories, Frick Collection Library, no. 1289, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://RESEARCH.FRICK.ORG/MONTIAS/BROWSERECORD.PHP?-ACTION=BROWSE&-RECID=2501.
• Inventory of Pieter van Rijn (1633–1712), 1676, Montias Database of Seventeenth Century Dutch Art Inventories, Frick Collection Library, no. 1365, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://RESEARCH.FRICK.ORG/MONTIAS/BROWSERECORD.PHP?-ACTION=BROWSE&-RECID=3772.
• Jackson, Kirsty. “Charles D’Orville Pilkington Jackson ARSA, FRBS, ARBA.” Mapping the Practice and Profession of Sculpture in Britain and Ireland 1851–1951, University of Glasgow History of Art and HATII, online database 2011, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://SCULPTURE.GLA.AC.UK/VIEW/PERSON.PHP?ID=MSIB6_1211212410.
• “Jacques-Philippe d’Orville,” French-language Wikipedia entry, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://FR.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/JACQUES_PHILIPPE_D%27ORVILLE; German-language Wikipedia entry, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTPS://DE.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/JACQUES_PHILIPPE_D%E2%80%99ORVILLE.
• Janson, H. W. Apes and Ape Lore, in the Middle Ages and in the Renaissance. Studies of the Warburg Institute, ed. H. Frankfort, vol. 20. London: Warburg Institute, 1952.
• “Keizersgracht 502.” Amsterdam Canal Houses, online database, accessed February 7, 2019, HTTP://WWW.AMSTERDAMSEGRACHTENHUIZEN.INFO/GRACHT/KGE/KGE600/KG16502.
• Kemmer, Claus. Review of Roy, Lairesse. Simiolus 23, nos. 2–3 (1995): 189.
• Kemmer, Claus. “In Search of Classical Form: Gerard de Lairesse’s Groot schilderboek and Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting.” Simiolus 26, nos. 1–2 (1998): 109. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.2307/3780872
• Keyes, G. S. Saenredam–R. Savery. Edited by K. G. Boon. In Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish, vol. 23. Amsterdam: Hertzberger, 1980.
• Lairesse, Gerard de. The Art of Painting. Translated by John Frederick Fritsch. London: J. F. Fritsch, 1738.
• Lairesse, Gerard de. The Great Book on Painting. Translated by Lyckle de Vries. CD supplement to Lyckle de Vries, How to Create Beauty: De Lairesse on the Theory and Practice of Making Art (Leiden: Primavera Press, 2011).
• Lammertse, Friso, and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Co.: Art and Commerce in Amsterdam 1625–1675. Exh. cat. London: Dulwich Picture Gallery; Amsterdam: The Rembrandt House Museum/Zwolle; Amsterdam: Waanders, 2006.
• Liedtke, Walter. Dutch Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art/New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.
• Logan, Anne-Marie. The “Cabinet” of the Brothers Gerard and Jan Reynst. Amsterdam, Oxford, and New York: North Holland Publishing Company, 1979.
• MacLaren, N. Revised by Christopher Brown. Catalogue of the Dutch School. London: National Gallery, 1991.   Mahon, Denis. “Notes on the ‘Dutch Gift’ to Charles II.” Burlington Magazine 91 (November 1949): 303–05; (December 1949): 349–50; 92 (January 1950), 12–18.
• Marandet, François. “‘The Anointing of Solomon” by Gerard de Lairesse Discovered in the Cartwright Hall Art Gallery, Bradford.” Burlington Magazine 148 (February 2016): 101–2.
• Meijer, D. C, Jr. “De Amsterdamche Schutters-Stukken in en Buiten het Nieuwe Rijksmuseum.” Oud Holland 3 (1885): 108–122.  HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/187501785×00305
• Meijer, D. C, Jr. Translated by Tom van der Molen. “The Amsterdam Civic Guard Portraits Within and Outside the New Rijksmuseum Part I.” Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5:1 (Winter 2013). HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.5092/JHNA.2013.5.1.4 
• Mitchell, Paul, and Lynn Roberts. A History of European Picture Frames. London: Paul Mitchell/Merrell Holberton, 1996.   NN. “Het geslacht Bessel, Van Bessel, Bessels.” Algemeen Nederlandsch Familieblad no. 81 (1884): 1–2.   Pennings, J. C. M. “Archival Management by the VOC (1602–1795).” History of the Arrangement of the VOC Archives, accessed February 7, 2019, http://www.tanap.net/content/voc/history/history_managevoc.htm.
• Poole, R. L. Revised and expanded by Kenneth Garlick. Catalogue of Portraits in the Bodleian Library. Oxford: Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, 2004.
• Reynolds, Anna. Essays and entries in Charles II: Art and Power. Edited by Martin Clayton and Rufus Bird. Exh. cat. London: Royal Collection Trust/University of Chicago Press, 2017.
• Ripa, Cesare. Iconologia. Paris: Jean Baudoin/Gallimet, 1643/44.
• Royal Academy. Flemish Art, 1300–1700. Exh. cat. London: Royal Academy, 1953.
• Roy, Alain. Gérard de Lairesse, 1640–1711. Paris: Arthena, 1992.
• Schipper, Claudia. “Mit Lust unter den Händen: Darstellungen der fünf Sinne in der bildenden Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts,” 2 vols. PhD diss., Utrecht University, 2000.
• Schutte, O. Repertorium der Nederlandse vertegenwoordigers residerende in het buitenland, 1584–1610. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1976.
• Sellink, Manfred. Cornelis Cort. Edited by Huigen Leeflang. In Hollstein, Dutch & Flemish. 3 vols. Rotterdam: Sound & Vision, 2000.
• Spliethoff, Marieke. “Amor omnia vincit: De drie oudste kinderen van stadhouder Frederik Hendrik en Amalia van Solms op een groepsportret door Gerard van Honthorst, 1629.” In Face Book: Studies on Dutch and Flemish Portraiture of the 16th–18th Centuries (Liber Amicorum presented to Rudolf E. O. Ekkart on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday), edited by Charles Dumas, 167–74. Leiden: Primavera Pers; The Hague: RKD, 2012.
• Stadsarchief Amsterdam (SAA), Archief van Commissarissen van de Desolate Boedelkamer [5072], 601, fol.241-46, April 2, 1676.
• Stadsarchief Amsterdam (SAA), Doop-, Trouw-, en Begraafregisters (DTB).
• Suchtelen, Ariane van. “Hendrick ter Brugghen’s Bacchante with an Ape: The Painter’s Working Method and Theme.” The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 19 (1991): 35–41.
• Suchtelen, Ariane van, and Quentin Buvelot. Genre Paintings in the Mauritshuis. The Hague: Mauritshuis/Zwolle: Waanders, 2016.
• Sullivan, Margaret. “Peter Bruegel the Elder’s Two Monkeys: A New Interpretation.” The Art Bulletin 63, no.1 (March 1981): 114–26. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.2307/3050090
• Tompkins, Ptolemy. The Monkey in Art. London: Scala, 1994.
• Toutziari, Georgia. “Gerard de Lairesse, Jacob and Rachel at the Well.” VADS NICE Paintings database, accessed February 6, 2019, https://vads.ac.uk/large.php?uid=87505.
• Uhlenbeck, J. D. “Het Amsterdamsche geslacht Bessels.” De Nederlandsche Leeuw 50 (1932): cols. 136–40; available online via the Koninklijk Nederlandsche Geenotschap voor Geslacht- en Wapenkunde website, accessed February 8, 2019, HTTPS://WWW.KNGGW.NL/RAADPLEGEN/DE-NEDERLANDSCHE-LEEUW/1932-50/78, 139.
• Veen, Jaap van der. “De allegorische familiegroep van een echtpaar met twee kinderen door Gerard de Lairesse: De Amsterdamse apotheker Christoffel Sprongh en zijn gezin.” Oud Holland 131, no.1 (2018): 3–16. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/18750176-13101002
• Veldman, Ilja. “Goltzius’ Zintuigen, Seizoenen, Elementen, Planeten en Vier tijden van de dag.” In Goltzius-studies: Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617). Edited by R. Falkenburg et al. Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 42–43 (1993): 310–12. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1163/22145966-90000623
• Veldman, Ilja. “Van allegorie naar genre in de Nederlandse prentkunst.” In De Boekenwereld 2 (1994–95): 66–68. Vercoe, Rosamund. Ravenscourt. London: Fulham and Hammersmith Historical Society, 1991.
• Watt, Rosemary. “Gerard de Lairesse (1640–1711), The Five Senses.” National Art Collections Fund 2001 Review (2002): 49, no. 4906.
• Wenley, Robert. “Masterpieces of a Merchant City.” Apollo 159 (2006): 48.
• Winkel, Marieke de. “Rollenspel.” In Kopstukken: Amsterdammers geportretteerd 1600–1800, 96–97. Edited by Norbert Middelkoop. Exh. cat. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Historisch Museum/Bussum: Thoth, 2002.
• Wishnevsky, Rose. “Studien zum ‘portrait historié’ in den Nederlanden.” PhD diss., University of Munich, 1965.
• Wright, Christopher. Images of a Golden Age. Edited by Richard Lockett. Exh. cat. Birmingham: Birmingham City Museums, 1989.
• Žakula, Tijana. “Striking a pose: the portrait between likeness and ideal.” Simiolus 37, Reforming Dutch Art: Gerard de Lairesse on Beauty, Morals and Class (2015): 88–109.

---

Originally published by the Journal of Historians for Netherlandish Art 12:1 (Winter 2020), DOI:10.5092/jhna.2020.12.1.8, under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license.