HERMAN MEINDERTSZ. DONCKER (Hoorn 1595 – circa 1656)
An Enkhuizen Family Group with Two Goats in a Wooded Landscape
oil on panel
37 x 55 inches (94 x 139.5 cm.)
PROVENANCE
Thomas Jefferson Bryan, by the early 1850s, to
The Bryan Gallery of Christian Art, New York, 1852 – 1867, when given to
The New York Historical Society, New York, 1867 until 1980 when deaccessioned at
Old Master Paintings of Thomas J. Bryan, The Property of the New York Historical Society, Sotheby Parke Bernet Inc., New York, October 9, 1980, lot 63, illustrated (as by Herman Mignerts Doncker, Portrait of the Burgomaster D’Eyselyhn of Rotterdam and his Family)
The Leger Galleries LTD., London by May 1981
Peter Tillou, Litchfield, Connecticut until 2022
EXHIBITED
Pictura, Maastricht, The Netherlands, May 22 -31, 1981, (with The Leger Galleries LTD.)
LITERATURE
Richard Grant White, Companion to the Bryan Gallery of Christian Art, Baker, Godwin & Co., Printers, New York, 1853, pp. 52-53, no. 82, (as by Albert Cuyp, Portraits of the Burgomaster d’Eyselyhn and his Family)
Catalog of the Museum and Gallery of Art of the New York Historical Society, New York, 1866, p. 32, no. 281, (as by Jacob G. Cuyp, Portraits of the Burgomaster d’Eyselyhn of Rotterdam and his Family) reprinted 1868, 1869, 1870, 1871, 1873, 1874, 1877, 1881, 1883, 1885, 1887, 1893, 1903, and 1915
London, The Leger Galleries LTD., Old Master Paintings, pp. 24-25, no. 11, illustrated, (as by Herman Mignerts Doncker, A Portrait of the de Ysseltyn Family)
Rudolf E. O. Ekkart, Portret van Enkhuizen in de gouden eeuw, Zuiderzeemuseum, Enkhuizen, 1990, pp. 27, 29-30, no. 39, illustrated (as by Herman Doncker, Family Portrait)
Wendell Garrett, “The New York Historical Society” in Important Old Master Paintings, The Property of The New York Historical Society, Sotheby’s, New York, January 12, 1995, unpaginated, illustrated.
León Krempel, Nicolaes Maes, Michael Imhof Verlag, Germany, 2000, p. 125, fn. 71 (as by Herman Doncker (?), allegedly Burgomaster d’Eyselyhn of Rotterdam and his Family)
Frauke Kathrin Laarman, “Herman Meindertsz. Doncker – Ein origineller Künstler zweiten Ranges” in Oud Holland, volume 114.1, 2000, pp. 23-24, 174, no. 40, illustrated (by Herman Meindertsz. Doncker, Portrait of a Married Couple with Three Children and Two Goats) (as location unknown)
Although Herman Meindertsz. Doncker is considered one of the most representative of seventeenth century artists working in Enkhuizen, there are no records of him in the town archives. Similarly scant information exists prior to Doncker settling in Enkhuizen. His earliest known work is from 1634, the same year he enrolled in the St. Luke Guild of Haarlem. His paintings from this time are primarily Merry Companies, which were popular in Haarlem, and recall those of Dirck Hals, one of the genre’s leading exponents. Doncker also painted historical subjects from 1644 – 1645, but the core of his production was portraiture. His earliest known portraits date from 1636 and probably coincide with his move to Enkhuizen, which is thought to have occurred between 1635 and 1641. It was at this point that he developed his own distinctive style, of which Portrait of a Family with Two Goats in a Wooded Landscape is a superb example. Although traditionally titled The Burgomaster d’Eyselyhn of Rotterdam and his Family, this appears to be apocryphal. His last dated works are a pair of portraits from 1650. Paintings by Doncker formed part of the permanent collections of the museums in Aachen, Amsterdam, Brussels, Hoorn, Houston, Mainz, Montreal, Oslo, Osnabrück, and Stockholm.[1]
Family groups that were always depicted outdoors formed the majority of Doncker’s output in portraiture. He adhered to the traditional compositional style of northern Holland which placed the family in linear fashion in front of a landscape, with the parents in the middle surrounded by their children. Painted for posterity the family’s values and beliefs were on full display.[2] This work, which is thought to have been painted circa 1645 – 1650,[3] show the parents slightly turned towards each other, reflective of their union. The husband’s placement on the right side of the composition with his wife to the left derives from the tradition found in dynastic portraiture of the sixteenth century. The husband is dressed in the latest fashion in all black with a square linen collar, one arm wrapped in a black cape, and a tall hat. Wearing blue silk stockings and black ribboned shoes, his stance depicts a man of action, complemented by the thrust of his elbow indicative of authority.[4] His wife dressed in traditional West Frisian costume, holds in her right hand a carnation that is symbolic of marriage, while her left is extended towards her young daughter. Half hidden in most Enkhuizen portraits of the period, but here on full display is the chatelaine that hangs from her belt. Used for carrying keys and other items, it is indicative of her management of a large household.[5]
In general, the population in and around Enkhuizen tended to be fairly conservative in their dress as demonstrated in this work by their all black and white attire.[6] The little girl who stands in front of her mother wears a white linen collar and apron over a black dress whose sleeves are trimmed with gold. The gold ornamentation echoes that of her mother’s and is indicative of wealth. The visible folds in her apron mark it as freshly laundered and as having just been removed from a cupboard, signifying a well-run household. She wears a four-strand coral necklace. Coral was believed to ward off disease and evil spirits, and just as coral once removed from reefs could be transformed into precious stones, hopefully so too did a child develop.[7] In her right hand she holds two cherries, which were regarded as the fruits of paradise, and symbolized the wish for a fruitful life.[8] Standing to her left, her brother similarly clothed holds a stick and the reins of a goat. At first glance it might seem surprising to refer to him as a boy, but both boys and girls at this age wore skirts and aprons and there does not seem to be a set rule as to when it was deemed appropriate to transfer young boys into breeches, although the average age appears to have been about seven.[9] But it is the tethered goat that leaves little doubt that this is a boy. Pets were routinely included in children’s portraits, and this could certainly be the case in this work, but they were also selected for their symbolic value. Goats had long been associated with lust and wantonness. His presence served as a warning for the boy to have temptation under control. It was generally felt that passions needed to be held in check from an early age, so as not to become a guiding force later in life. Girls were regarded as naturally more modest.[10]
To the little girl’s right is another brother brandishing a small whip with a prancing goat. He wears a black doublet with black sleeves topped by a flat linen collar fastened with tasseled band – strings, wide black knee breeches, and striking lavender stockings. While the rest of the family’s shoes are round toed his are square toed with black bows. Frauke Laarman believes this boy to be a latter addition to the panel, to which Rudolf Ekkart concurs and feels it is also by another painter. By the artist placing the family in a straight line in the original composition later children could be easily added,[11] with such additions not unusual.
The family is depicted strolling on a path in a wooded landscape combined with a panoramic view on the right. This leisurely act as well as the setting functions as a further revelation about the family and the image they wished to project. Painted visions of unpopulated bucolic settings coincided with the purchasing of country estates by wealthy townsmen during a period of increasing prosperity. The red soles and heels of their shoes echo this sentiment, as it signified that they were wealthy enough not to dirty their shoes. By 1650 The Netherlands was the richest country in the world. With the acquisition of an estate, an elevation in social class was assured. Even those who could not afford to purchase an estate sought to be painted in such a manner for the same reason – “a tangible expression of power and wealth”.[12] By painting the light in this work to reflect twilight the suggestion of tranquility was heightened.
The first recorded owner of this painting was Thomas Jefferson Bryan (1802 – 1870) who arrived in Europe sometime after 1829 and remained there until the early 1850s. Born into a wealthy Philadelphia family connected to John Jacob Astor, it is believed that Bryan spent $100,000 acquiring paintings during his European sojourn. Upon his return to America, he opened in 1852 the first permanent exhibition of Old Masters in New York which the press described as “the best and most reliable collection of original works that has ever been accessible to the public in this country”. Called the Bryan Gallery of Chritian Art, this painting was listed in their handbook under entry 82 as erroneously by Albert Cuyp. By 1867, following the theft of six paintings among other headaches, Bryan had had enough and deeded the collection to The New York Historical Society.[13]
The New York Historical Society was established in 1804, and until The Metropolitan Museum of Art opened in 1870, was the most important art museum in New York. In 1866 the Society’s initial cataloguing of our painting changed its attribution to Albert’s father Jacob Gerritsz. Cuyp along with a note stating, “The landscape is probably not by Cuyp”. This entry was reprinted in 14 subsequent catalogs, with the last one done in 1915. Having virtually ceased acquiring Old Master paintings by World War I, their decision to sell works from the Byran bequest in 1980 stemmed from the realization of the need to focus on the “Society’s primary function as a repository and collector of items relating to American history and American artists”.[14]
The sales catalogues of The New-York Historical Society property sold at Parke – Bernet Galleries on October 9, 1980, represented “the most complete general cataloguing, with illustrations, ever attempted to date of the Historical Society’s European paintings”.[15] This would be the first time the family group was correctly identified as the work of Herman Meindertsz. Doncker, later corroborated by Rudolf Ekkart in his 1990 catalog Portrait of Enkhuizen in the Golden Age, as well as Frauke Kathrin Laarman’s 2000 catalogue raisonné on the painter. Most likely purchased at this sale, the Doncker next featured in a catalog and was exhibited at Pictura, Maastricht in 1981 by the renowned Leger Galleries of London. Afterwards it would be acquired by the distinguished American dealer Peter Tillou who retained ownership until his death in 2022.
In a superb state due to its relatively few past owners along with their careful stewardship, we are delighted to bring Herman Meindertsz. Doncker’s An Enkhuizen Family with Two Goats in a Landscape back to the market.
[1] Biographical information taken from Rudolf E. O. Ekkart, “Herman Doncker” in Portret van Enkhuizen in de gouden eeuw, Zuiderzeemuseum, Enkhuizen, September 15, 1990 - January 15, 1991, p. 25; and Frauke Kathrin Laarman, op.cit., pp. 8-9, 15-16,20, 174.
[2] Frauke Kathrin Laarman, op.cit., pp. 22-23.
[3] Rudolf E. O. Ekkart dates it to circa 1645, and Frauke Kathrin Laarman to 1645 – 1650.
[4] Frauke Kathrin Laarman, op.cit., p. 24; and Denise Giannino, Familial Identity and Site Specificity: A Study of the Hybrid Genre of Seventeenth Century Dutch Family – Landscape Portraiture, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas, November 2017, p. 93.
[5] Rudolf E. O. Ekkart, op.cit., p. 29.
[6] Frauke Kathrin Laarman, op.cit., p. 24.
[7] Katlijne Van der Stighelen, “Peter Paul Rubens” in Pride and Joy, Children’s Portraits in the Netherlands 1500 – 1700, Leiden Press, Ghent, 2000, p. 81.
[8] Denise Giannino, op.cit., p. 64.
[9] Saskia Kuus, “Skirts for Girls and Boys” in Pride and Joy, op.cit., p. 81.
[10] Jan Baptiste Bedaux, The Reality of Symbols, Gary Swartz, SDU Publishing, The Hague, 1990, pp. 141, 146; and Annemarieke Willemsen, “Images of Toys, The Culture of Play in The Netherlands Around 1600” in Pride and Joy, op.cit., p. 62.
[11] Rudolf E. O. Ekkart, op.cit., p. 29; and Frauke Kathrin Laarman, op.cit., p. 24.
[12] Alison McNeil Kettering, The Dutch Arcadia, Pastoral Art and its Audience in the Golden Age, Totowa, New Jersey, 1983, pp. 10 - 11, 70 - 71.; and Katie Hill, “ The Scarlet Heel – A Brief History of Red High Heels”, May 12, 2011, @sassybella.com.
[13] Scott Schaeffer, “Private Collecting and the Public Good”, Sotheby’s, 1995s op.cit., unpaginated.
[14] “Foreword”, Sotheby’s Parke Bernet Inc., 1980, op.cit., unpaginated, “Note on the Catalogues of the Collections from The New York Historical Society”, Sotheby’s, 1995, op.cit., unpaginated; Wendell Garett, op.cit., unpaginated; Scott Schaeffer, op.cit., unpaginated.
[15] “A Note on the Catalogues of the Collections from The New York Historical Society”, Sotheby’s, 1995, op.cit., unpaginated.