Kunsthandel P. de Boer bv
Schilderijen tot 1800
description
ATTRIBUTED TO JACOB WOUTERSZ. VOSMAER
1584 -Delft-1641
Still life of flowers in a niche
Oil on panel, 78 x 58 cm
Provenance:
With Edward Speelman, London, 1950, as by Ambrosius Bosschaert
Private collection, UK, bought from Speelman, August 1950
Still life of flowers in a glass vase standing in a niche of grey stone. The bouquet includes various types of roses and tulips, irises, martagon lily, forget-me-not, campanula, and gladiolus. Around the vase, at the bottom of the niche, are loose leaves and petals, a dead frog, and a small tortoise shell butterfly.
Jacob Vosmaer was born in Delft. It is unknown from whom he learned his trade. Vosmaer journeyed to Italy, probably after the conclusion of his training. He was back in Delft before early 1608, joining the local guild before 1613 and working there until his death in June 1641. He was a respected citizen, a captain of the local militia, and engaged as such in campaigns in Brabant. Arnold Houbraken (in his De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen […], 1718) reports that Vosmaer started off as a landscape painter, and a seascape by him features in a 1626 Delft inventory.1 A view of Mookerheide was recorded in his estate after his death.2 No other works than still lifes, predominantly of flowers, are known today, however. The fact that he did paint occasional fruit pieces is borne out by examples mentioned in his estate.3 His known oeuvre is only small, and signed examples are few. Best known is a flower painting that is signed and dated 1613, acquired by the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam in 2019 (fig.1). A second version of the same composition, cut down at the top and (less so) on the sides is in New York (fig. 2). These are early works by the artist, which are quite painterly and mannerist in handling. Vosmaer’s further development can be followed via two dated examples from 1616 (figs. 3 and 4), and an indistinctly dated example of which the last digit is illegible, but the third is most probably a 3, placing it in the 1630s (fig. 5). Vosmaer’s handling of the flowers, already in 1616, became less mannerist and smoother, and his compositions somewhat more atmospheric.
Intriguing is a flower painting that bears an old inscription and date ‘CLAES.IVNBOL. ANNOO.16.2´ (fig. 6). On the basis if that inscription, it has been attributed to Anthony Claesz. II (1607-1649), but it fits much better in the oeuvre of Jacob Woutersz. Vosmaer.4 It shares some flowers with the second example from 1616 (fig. 4), while the handling of the roses is closely related to roses in the 1630s example (fig. 5). The date, if at all authentic, is more likely 1632 than 1622. The use of the niche is also a characteristic feature of Vosmaer, although he tended to include only the right edge of the niche in his compositions. The globular glass vase features in all of his known flower paintings after 1613. There can be little doubt that the painting discussed here and that in figure 6 are by the same hand. The compositions of the two works are very similar, they are virtually the same size and share several flowers. As is clear from figures 1 to 5, Vosmaer tended to repeat motifs/flowers (although often not fully identically) and vary closely on compositions. The overblown tulip at lower left in the present bouquet must have been based on the same model as the one similarly placed in the bouquets in figures 4 and 5. Due to the facts that the painting in figure 6 bears its unexplained inscription and that the present painting is not (or no longer) signed, the attribution will have to remain somewhat tentative, even though motifs and quality point to Jacob Woutersz. Vosmaer.
A date in the 1630s for the present painting (and consequently for that in fig. 6) appears to be confirmed by the presence of the dead frog at lower left. It appears to have been inspired by a little painting by Ambrosius Bosschaert the Younger, now in Paris (fig. 7). That painting is not dated, but is generally considered to have originated in the second half of the 1630s, which would place the present painting’s origin somewhat after 1635. Assuming that the attribution to Vosmaer is correct, which is highly likely, this makes both paintings late works by the artist. The dead frog enhances the sense of vanitas that is generally borne out by flower paintings, especially when they include several flowers that are past their prime, like here. * * * Fred G. Meijer Art History report 063 – 22 September 2024 * * * 3
1 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1613, oil on panel, 110 x 79 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. SK-A-5069
2 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, oil on panel, 85.1 x 62.5 cm. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 71.5
3 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1616, oil on panel, 76.5 x 61 cm. Art market, 1978
4 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1616, oil on panel, 79 x 61 cm. The Netherlands, Private collection, 1931 * * * Fred G. Meijer Art History report 063 – 22 September 2024 * * * 4
1 M. Montias, Artists and artisans in Delft : a socio-economic study of the seventeenth century (1982), p. 148.
2 F.D.O. Obreen (ed.), Archief voor Nederlandsche kunstgeschiedenis : verzameling van meerendeels onuitgegeven berichten en mededeelingen betreffende Nederlandsche schilders, plaatsnijders, beeldhouwers, bouwmeesters […], vol. 5 (1882-1883), p. 58.
3 An example that can tentatively be attributed to him, with only the initial J of the signature visible and the date 1627 (oil on panel, 27 x 40.1 cm) was in sale Amsterdam, Christie’s, 6 May 2008, lot 174.
4 ‘Iunbol’ translates as onion bulb, easily interpreted as tulip bulb. S. Segal and K. Alen, Dutch and Flemish flower pieces: paintings, drawings and prints up to the nineteenth century (2020), p. 303, accepted the attribution to Claesz. and read the date as 1622, calling it an early work. This would mean Claesz. painted this fully mature work at the age of 14 or 15, which seems highly unlikely. Moreover, the ‘Claes’ in the inscription must be a first name, not as a patronymic as in Anthony Claesz. (whose first name thus was Anthony, not Claes).
5 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and indistinctly dated 16[3]., oil on panel, 57.3 x 43.5 cm. Art market, 1996
6 attributed to Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, incribed and dated CLAES.IVNBOL.ANNOO.16.2, oil on panel, 81 x 58.5 cm. Art market, 1985, as by Anthony Claesz.
7 Ambrosius Bosschaert II, signed, oil on copper, 12.5 x 17.5 cm. Paris, Fondation Custodia, inv. no. 182
NOTES
1584 -Delft-1641
Still life of flowers in a niche
Oil on panel, 78 x 58 cm
Provenance:
With Edward Speelman, London, 1950, as by Ambrosius Bosschaert
Private collection, UK, bought from Speelman, August 1950
Still life of flowers in a glass vase standing in a niche of grey stone. The bouquet includes various types of roses and tulips, irises, martagon lily, forget-me-not, campanula, and gladiolus. Around the vase, at the bottom of the niche, are loose leaves and petals, a dead frog, and a small tortoise shell butterfly.
Jacob Vosmaer was born in Delft. It is unknown from whom he learned his trade. Vosmaer journeyed to Italy, probably after the conclusion of his training. He was back in Delft before early 1608, joining the local guild before 1613 and working there until his death in June 1641. He was a respected citizen, a captain of the local militia, and engaged as such in campaigns in Brabant. Arnold Houbraken (in his De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen […], 1718) reports that Vosmaer started off as a landscape painter, and a seascape by him features in a 1626 Delft inventory.1 A view of Mookerheide was recorded in his estate after his death.2 No other works than still lifes, predominantly of flowers, are known today, however. The fact that he did paint occasional fruit pieces is borne out by examples mentioned in his estate.3 His known oeuvre is only small, and signed examples are few. Best known is a flower painting that is signed and dated 1613, acquired by the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam in 2019 (fig.1). A second version of the same composition, cut down at the top and (less so) on the sides is in New York (fig. 2). These are early works by the artist, which are quite painterly and mannerist in handling. Vosmaer’s further development can be followed via two dated examples from 1616 (figs. 3 and 4), and an indistinctly dated example of which the last digit is illegible, but the third is most probably a 3, placing it in the 1630s (fig. 5). Vosmaer’s handling of the flowers, already in 1616, became less mannerist and smoother, and his compositions somewhat more atmospheric.
Intriguing is a flower painting that bears an old inscription and date ‘CLAES.IVNBOL. ANNOO.16.2´ (fig. 6). On the basis if that inscription, it has been attributed to Anthony Claesz. II (1607-1649), but it fits much better in the oeuvre of Jacob Woutersz. Vosmaer.4 It shares some flowers with the second example from 1616 (fig. 4), while the handling of the roses is closely related to roses in the 1630s example (fig. 5). The date, if at all authentic, is more likely 1632 than 1622. The use of the niche is also a characteristic feature of Vosmaer, although he tended to include only the right edge of the niche in his compositions. The globular glass vase features in all of his known flower paintings after 1613. There can be little doubt that the painting discussed here and that in figure 6 are by the same hand. The compositions of the two works are very similar, they are virtually the same size and share several flowers. As is clear from figures 1 to 5, Vosmaer tended to repeat motifs/flowers (although often not fully identically) and vary closely on compositions. The overblown tulip at lower left in the present bouquet must have been based on the same model as the one similarly placed in the bouquets in figures 4 and 5. Due to the facts that the painting in figure 6 bears its unexplained inscription and that the present painting is not (or no longer) signed, the attribution will have to remain somewhat tentative, even though motifs and quality point to Jacob Woutersz. Vosmaer.
A date in the 1630s for the present painting (and consequently for that in fig. 6) appears to be confirmed by the presence of the dead frog at lower left. It appears to have been inspired by a little painting by Ambrosius Bosschaert the Younger, now in Paris (fig. 7). That painting is not dated, but is generally considered to have originated in the second half of the 1630s, which would place the present painting’s origin somewhat after 1635. Assuming that the attribution to Vosmaer is correct, which is highly likely, this makes both paintings late works by the artist. The dead frog enhances the sense of vanitas that is generally borne out by flower paintings, especially when they include several flowers that are past their prime, like here. * * * Fred G. Meijer Art History report 063 – 22 September 2024 * * * 3
1 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1613, oil on panel, 110 x 79 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. SK-A-5069
2 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, oil on panel, 85.1 x 62.5 cm. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 71.5
3 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1616, oil on panel, 76.5 x 61 cm. Art market, 1978
4 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and dated 1616, oil on panel, 79 x 61 cm. The Netherlands, Private collection, 1931 * * * Fred G. Meijer Art History report 063 – 22 September 2024 * * * 4
1 M. Montias, Artists and artisans in Delft : a socio-economic study of the seventeenth century (1982), p. 148.
2 F.D.O. Obreen (ed.), Archief voor Nederlandsche kunstgeschiedenis : verzameling van meerendeels onuitgegeven berichten en mededeelingen betreffende Nederlandsche schilders, plaatsnijders, beeldhouwers, bouwmeesters […], vol. 5 (1882-1883), p. 58.
3 An example that can tentatively be attributed to him, with only the initial J of the signature visible and the date 1627 (oil on panel, 27 x 40.1 cm) was in sale Amsterdam, Christie’s, 6 May 2008, lot 174.
4 ‘Iunbol’ translates as onion bulb, easily interpreted as tulip bulb. S. Segal and K. Alen, Dutch and Flemish flower pieces: paintings, drawings and prints up to the nineteenth century (2020), p. 303, accepted the attribution to Claesz. and read the date as 1622, calling it an early work. This would mean Claesz. painted this fully mature work at the age of 14 or 15, which seems highly unlikely. Moreover, the ‘Claes’ in the inscription must be a first name, not as a patronymic as in Anthony Claesz. (whose first name thus was Anthony, not Claes).
5 Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, signed and indistinctly dated 16[3]., oil on panel, 57.3 x 43.5 cm. Art market, 1996
6 attributed to Jacob Wz. Vosmaer, incribed and dated CLAES.IVNBOL.ANNOO.16.2, oil on panel, 81 x 58.5 cm. Art market, 1985, as by Anthony Claesz.
7 Ambrosius Bosschaert II, signed, oil on copper, 12.5 x 17.5 cm. Paris, Fondation Custodia, inv. no. 182
NOTES
toegeschreven aan JACOB WOUTERSZ. VOSMAER 1584 -Delft-1641
Bloemstuk in een glazen vaas in een nis
Olieverf op paneel 78 x 58 cm.
Olieverf op paneel 78 x 58 cm.
Contact
Kunsthandel P. de Boer bv
Amsterdam
