Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
How to cite
Bakker, Piet. “Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 4th ed.
Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. and Elizabeth Nogrady with Caroline Van Cauwenberge. New York, 2023–.
https://theleidencollection.com/essays/frans-van-mieris-the-elder-and-his-four-leiden-patrons/ (accessed November 10,2024).
A PDF of every version of this essay is available in this Online Catalogue's Archive, and the Archive is managed by apermanent URL. New versions are added only when a substantive change to the narrative occurs.

© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 2 of 16

After Rembrandt van Rijn (1606–69) moved to Amsterdam in 1631, his pupil
Gerrit Dou (1613–75) soon took over his master’s prominent position as
Leiden’s leading painter.[1] Dou’s meticulous and detailed manner of painting
exerted a great influence on scores of young and ambitious local artists. Only
one of them, however, ever attained his high level: Frans van Mieris the Elder(1635–81), “the prince of his pupils,” who, according to Dou, “carried off thecrown from them all” (fig 1).[2] Van Mieris’s work, like that of his master, was
exclusively in the reach of the elite and, given the prices he commanded, only
the very wealthiest of them. This essay examines these buyers, specificallythe four whom Houbraken deemed to be the artist’s most important patrons:
Isaac Gerard (1616–94), Franciscus de le Boë Sylvius (1614–72), Cornelis
Paets (1636–94), and the mysterious “Vredenburg.”[3]Van Mieris vis-à-vis Dou

Fig 1. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Self-Portrait at the Age of32, 1667, oil on panel, 45 x 39
cm, The National Trust,Polesden Lacey, Surrey, The
National Trust, inv. no. NT
1246501.

Van Mieris initially worked in the style of his master; his Kitchen Maid Drawing
Water from a Well made before 1655 is even a literal copy of an original by
Dou.[4] He most likely produced other early work while in Dou’s workshop,
including Elderly Couple in an Interior from The Leiden Collection (fig 2). After
1658, the year Van Mieris joined the Leiden Guild of Saint Luke, however, heincreasingly distanced himself from his teacher. Though he still derived
subjects from Dou, he now drew inspiration from the Haarlem genre painterAdriaen van Ostade (1610–85), whose work found particular favor inLeiden.[5] Other important influences were his fellow townsmen Quiringh van
Brekelenkam (after 1622–ca. 1669) (fig 3), with whom he had worked as apupil in Dou’s workshop for some time, and Gabriel Metsu (1629–67) (fig 4).
Moreover, he and his good friend Jan Steen (1625/26–79), who had returned
to Leiden from Delft in 1657, mutually influenced each other. Van Mieris
based his various versions of Oyster Meal on Steen’s somewhat earlier GirlFig 2. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Elderly Couple in an
Interior, ca. 1650–55, oil on
panel, 52 x 39.6 cm, The Leiden
Collection, New York, inv. no.
FM-100.

Eating Oysters now in The Hague, while Steen derived his variationsof Doctor’s Visit from Van Mieris’s famous “prototype” in Vienna (fig 5). Van
Mieris’s definitive break with his master’s style, however, can be credited
to Gerard ter Borch (1617–81), whose genre paintings of prosperous figuresin elegant interiors had a substantial impact on Van Mieris.[6] Van Mieris musthave already been quite familiar with Ter Borch’s work in the 1650s, judging
from the affinity between his Child’s Lesson (Hannah Entrusting Her Son
Samuel into the Care of the High-Priest Eli?) (fig 6) from the second half ofthe 1650s and Ter Borch’s The Reading Lesson from just after 1650 (fig 7).[7]Fig 3. Quiringh van
Brekelenkam, Fisherman and
His Wife in an Interior, 1657, oil
on panel, 47 x 60.3 cm, The
Leiden Collection, New York,
inv. no. QB-100.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 3 of 16

Van Mieris lived up to Dou’s expectations and, already quite early in his
career, gained a reputation equal to and sometimes even surpassing that ofhis master. For instance, Cornelis de Bie’s (1627–1715) comment in 1661
that whoever sees a picture by Van Mieris “has the work of Dou in mind,”underscores the parity between the two painters.[8] The Amsterdam city
physician Jan Sysmus, in about 1670, even deemed Van Mieris to be “better
than Dou.”[9] The view that Van Mieris eclipsed his teacher was also held by
the Frenchman Roger de Piles (1635–1709), who noted in his La vie despeintres of about 1695 that Van Mieris improved on Dou particularly withrespect to composition and coloration.[10] Gerard de Lairesse (1641–1711)
also estimated Van Mieris above Dou in some respects: “Francis Mieris has
not only curiously followed his master Gerrard Dou, in the elegant modern
manner, but is, in some things, his superior.”[11]Fig 4. Gabriel Metsu, Old
Woman at Her Meal in an
Interior, ca. 1654–57, oil oncanvas, 82.6 x 68.7 cm, The
Leiden Collection, New York,
inv. no. GM-102.

Surprisingly, however, much as with Dou, extant estate inventories in Leiden
and other cities do not list many of Van Mieris’s paintings and provide little
documentation about his reputation.. His name is not among the mostfrequently cited artists in seventeenth-century estate inventories (see Tables 2
and 3 in the essay Leiden Fijnschilders and the Local Art Market in the Golden
Age in this catalogue). Of the 258 Leiden estate inventories used for thisresearch, only ten list works by Van Mieris.[12] This seeming anomaly is not as
strange as it might initially appear, for Van Mieris’s work, like that of Dou, wasso expensive that only a select few could afford to buy it.

Isaac Gerard and the Price of Van Mieris’s Work
Van Mieris was one of the best-paid painters in the Dutch Republic.

Fig 5. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, The Doctor’s Visit , 1657,
oil on panelcopper, 33.84 x
26.87 cm., , Kunsthistorisches
Museum, Vienna, inv. no. 590.

Attestations of this fact are found primarily in literary sources, and theygenerally touch on the exorbitant amounts that foreign princes were willing to
pay for his work. These were often substantially higher than the valuations
given in the estate inventories of burghers and dealers.[13] Of the more than
750 paintings evaluated in the 258 Leiden estate inventories, only 22 were
worth 100 or more guilders. Of this modest number, 15 works—including thethree most valuable ones, all by Van Mieris—were the property of a single
individual. The owner of this first-rate collection was Isaac Gerard, one of thefourpatrons[14]

Schouburgh.

of

Van

Mierismentionedby

HoubrakeninhisGerard, a bachelor, was a fabulously wealthy merchant withbusinesses in Leiden and Amsterdam.[15] He was also a member of thevroedschap, or town council. He lived in Leiden in a splendid house at 24
Rapenburg that had formerly been the property of the banker Francois
Tortarolis, from whose heirs Isaac Gerard bought it in 1654 for the steep priceFig 6. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Child’s Lesson (Hannah
Entrusting Her Son Samuel into
to the Care of the High Priest
Eli?), ca. 1656–57, oil on panel
with arched top, 29.2 x 21.7 cm,© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 4 of 16

of 25,000 guilders.[16]The Leiden Collection, New
York, inv. no. FM-102.

Little else is known about him, but the estate he left behind in 1694 confirmsthat Houbraken was right—Gerard was a great aficionado of Van
Mieris.[17] Among the close to two hundred paintings with a total value of morethan 6,100 guilders, five were by Van Mieris, three of which were the mosthighly valued of them all. “Een stuckje daer osters gegeten warden” (Apicture in which oysters are being eaten), possibly The Oyster Eaters in St.
Petersburg (fig 8), was valued at 750 guilders by the painter Jacob
Toorenvliet (1640–1719) and the art dealer Cornelis Berckhey; “een slapent
mannetje” (a man sleeping), possibly The Sleeping Officer in Munich (fig 9),
at 660 guilders; and “een stuckie met drie figuurties” (a picture with threefigures) at 500 guilders.[18] No such high valuations occur in any of the other
Leiden estate inventories. Moreover, the fourth most expensive painting was
also the property of Gerard, “een nagtstuckie” (a nocturnal scene) by GerritFig 7. Gerard ter Borch, The
Reading Lesson, ca. 1652, oil
on panel, 27 x 25 cm, Musée du
Louvre, inv. no. M.I. 1006, ©
RMN-Grand Palais / Art
Resource, NY, Photo: GérardBlot.

Dou worth 300 guilders according to the appraisers. Whether these generous
amounts correspond to the prices Gerard actually paid for the works is notcertain. Gerard’s inventory dates from 1697, long after the death of both Dou
and Van Mieris, and in a period when their work fetched record prices at
auction.[19]Franciscus de le Boë Sylvius
The most important of the four patrons mentioned by Houbraken in his
biography of Van Mieris was Franciscus de le Boë Sylvius, who also features
elsewhere in this catalogue as a benefactor of Dou (fig 10). Originally ofFrench-Flemish origins, Sylvius was born in Hanau, Germany in 1614 to themerchant Isaac de le Boë (1588–1643) and Anna Vignet (d. 1648). He moved
to Leiden to study medicine in 1634.[20] Disappointed with the academic

Fig 8. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Oyster Eaters, 1659, oil
on panel, 44.5 x 34.5 cm, The
State Hermitage Museum, St.
Petersburg, inv. no. ??-917, ©
The State Hermitage Museum.
Photo: Vladimir Terebenin.

climate, he left the following year and went on to obtain a doctoral degree in
Basel, before returning to Leiden in 1638 as a professor. This second sojourn
too was short lived, for he moved to Amsterdam in 1641 and opened whatproved to be a highly successful and profitable physician’s practice. There, in
1649, he married Anna de Ligne (1626–57), the youngest daughter of thewealthy grain merchant Abraham de Ligne and Catharina de Willem.[21]After the death of his wife in 1657, Sylvius accepted a position as professor of
medicine in Leiden for an honorarium of 1,800 guilders per year, twice what
his colleagues received. By then his reputation extended far beyond the Dutch
Republic. For instance, a German student commended “Sir Dr. Sylvio […] [for]his erudition, which brought him fame unequaled in Holland and Germany. All

Fig 9. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Sleeping Officer in an
Inn, ca. 1666, oil on panel, 42.5
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 5 of 16

of the great men in Europe sought his council and gave him lavish
gifts.”[22] Foreign scholars who spent some time in Leiden also spoke of him
with respect. The Danish scholar Ole Borch (1626–90), who was in Leiden

x 33 cm, Bayerische
Staatsgemäldesammlungen,
Alte Pinakothek, Munich, inv.
no. 241. © bpk, Berlin / Art
Resource, NY.

between 1661 and 1663, took detailed notes of Sylvius’s lectures and thechemistry experiments he conducted in his laboratory at his house on the
Rapenburg. Borch also wrote extensively about his discussions with
Sylvius.[23] Borch, thus, was speaking from first-hand experience when helavished praise on Sylvius, extolling his character in a letter in 1661 to theDanish physicist and mathematician Thomas Bartholinus (1616–80).[24]Sylvius was a great art lover, who at the time of his death in 1672 left behind
185 pictures, though whether he personally purchased them all is unknown.
For example, research on his second wife, Margareta Lucretia (ca. 1647–69)
makes it clear that her contribution to the collection was significantly larger
than has hitherto been assumed. Not only did she inherit family portraits, but
presumably also the portraits of Queen Christina of Sweden, and of Martin
Luther and his wife, as well as the portrait of King Charles I of England by
Anthony van Dyck (1599–1640). The picture by Adam Elsheimer (1578–1610)

Fig 10. Fig 10. Cornelis vanDalen II, Portrait of Franciscus
de le Boë Sylvius, 1659,
engraving, 306 x 238 mm,
British Museum, London, inv.
no. 1864,0714.17, © Trusteesof the British Museum.

described in the estate inventory as “een groot Duyts landschap” (a large
German landscape) most likely also came from her father’s estate.[25]Margareta Lucretia was the daughter of Johann Friedrich Schlezer(1609/10–ca. 1673), from Mecklenburg, and Maria Tentenier (d. 1648), of
Utrecht.[26] Her mother hailed from a family of merchants that had gained entry
into Utrecht’s patriciate. Her father was born to a distinguished Lutheranfamily, several members of which moved in the social circles around theSwedish court.[27] Johann’s father, as well as his grandfather, had been the
personal physician of the Swedish king, and his brother Adolf wasambassador of Brandenburg in Stockholm. Schlezer came to the Dutch
Republic to read mathematics at the Leiden Academy in 1629.

[28]

He

continued his study in Rostock, but was back in Leiden once more in 1634 asa student of mathematics.[29]Fig 11. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Portrait of Florentius
Schuyl (1619–1669), 1666, oilon copper on panel, 21.3 x 16.5
cm, Mauritshuis, The Hague,
inv. no. 107.

Schlezer was in Utrecht in 1641 and 1644, perhaps serving as a diplomat. His
compatriot and a co-student from his Leiden years, Martinus Tancken, who
assisted him in drawing up his wedding contract in Utrecht in 1641, stated that
he was an envoy of the Danish crown in The Hague. Schlezer was, in any
event, a diplomatic agent between 1644 and 1658, and took part in many
important missions as “secretaris van de Geheime Kamer” (secretary of the
Privy Council) in the service of Elector Frederick William I (1620–88) ofBrandenburg. Schlezer seems to have played a key role in 1646 in the© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 6 of 16

wedding negotiations between the Great Elector and Louise Henriette of
Nassau (1627–67), daughter of Stadholder Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) andAmalia van Solms (1602–75). Margareta Lucretia Schlezer was born in Kleve,
which probably indicates that she was born soon after the electoral wedding,since Frederick William and his bride spent the first years of their marriage inthat city.[30] Schlezer later served as ambassador on behalf of Brandenburg in
Hamburg in 1651, and again in London in 1655.[31]Some art historians believe that Sylvius and Van Mieris enjoyed a relationshipsimilar to that between Pieter Spiering and Dou.[32] Houbraken, however,writes that Van Mieris “regularly requested that any work that he [Van Mieris]created might be for him, or that he might be granted the privilege of paying a
pricecommensurateoffered.”

[33]

with

what

another[collector]

hadalready

Words such as “dikwerf” (regularly), “verzogt” (requested), and“mogt wezen” (might be) are not indicative of an existing situation, but rather

Fig 12. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, Double Portrait ofFranciscus de le Boë Sylvius
and His Wife, known as “TheMusic Lesson,” 1672, oil on
panel with arched top, 41 x 31
cm, Gemäldegalerie Alte
Meister, Dresden, inv no. 1743.

a desired one.[34] It is also highly questionable whether Sylvius could afford
the kind of financial agreement that existed between Dou and Spiering. Thereis no doubt that he was wealthy, but whether he was rich enough to pay 500
guilders a year for the right of first refusal is unlikely.[35] That Sylvius greatly
admired Van Mieris’s work, however, is evident: at his death he owned no
fewer than seven pictures by the artist. Still, that is four fewer than by Dou.
Patronage involved more than buying works of art; there were other ways of
promoting one’s protégé. For instance, Sylvius ensured that Van Mieris
gained entry into his scholarly network. This is suggested by the portraits Van
Mieris made of two professors, Florentius Schuyl (1619–69) (fig 11) andFrancois Gomarus (ca. 1615–69), the latter of which is known only from his
estate inventory.[36] In 1722, a double portrait of Sylvius and wife (fig 12) was

Fig 13. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, The Cloth Shop, 1660, oil
on panel, 54.5 x 42.7 cm,
Kunsthistorisches Museum,
Vienna, inv. no. 586.

in the possession of Maria Justina Kraij, the only traceable Haarlem owner ofa work by Van Mieris.[37] Since she possessed several more pictures by Van
Mieris, as well as paintings by other Leiden artists, it is plausible that she, or
her parents, inherited them from a relative in Leiden.[38] A suitable candidate is
Susanna Claessens, Maria’s great-aunt and the wife of Paulus Barbette(1620–65), a famous physician who died in Amsterdam in 1665.[39] Barbetteadmired Sylvius greatly and knew him well.[40] No inventory of his estate wasmade after his death, but one that was drawn up when his widow passed
away seven years later mentions “de print van Silvius” (the print of Sylvius),
which probably refers to a portrait print by Cornelis van Dalen of 1659 (fig 10).[41] Although there is no direct indication that Barbette was the original ownerof Van Mieris’s double portrait of Silvius and his wife, given the family
relationship he seems ideally suited for ordering an expensive portrait ofFig 14. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, A Sleeping Courtesan,
1669, oil on copper, 27.5 x 22.5
cm, Uffizi Gallery, Florence, inv.
no. 1263, © 2015. Photo Scala,© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 7 of 16

someone he knew well, but who was not a relative.

Florence -courtesy of the
Ministero Beni e Att. Culturali.

Sylvius sometimes mediated actively on behalf of Van Mieris. Houbraken
writes that in 1660 Van Mieris “through the grace of the gentlemanmentioned, his patron [Sylvius]” had the opportunity to paint a picture forArchduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria (1614–62), which became one of theArchduke’s favorite paintings: “a beautiful woman in a silk cloth shop, and an
officer,” presently known as The Cloth Shop (fig 13).[42] The commission could
have radically altered the course of Van Mieris’s career. Not only did hereceive the astonishingly high sum of 1,000 guilders for the work, but he wasalso invited to become Leopold’s court painter in Vienna for a staggering
annual stipend of 2,500 guilders.[43] The painter thanked the Archduke mostkindly for this signal honor, but asserted that he was compelled to decline
because his wife was unwilling to leave Leiden. The truth of the matter,
however, was that Van Mieris did not lack in profitable commissions in Leiden
and therefore felt no acute need to leave his hometown.

Fig 15. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, “Self-Portrait” with a
Plumed Beret, 1668, oil on oval
panel, 11.3 x 8.2 cm, The
Leiden Collection, New York,
inv. no. FM-108.

Van Mieris found favor with yet another princely admirer: Cosimo III de’
Medici (1642–1723). In 1667 and 1669—before succeeding his father as GrandDuke of Tuscany in 1670—Cosimo made two incognito trips to the Dutch
Republic, during which he met many magistrates, scholars and artists.[44] Healso visited Sylvius’s home on the Rapenburg, which is probably where hefirst became acquainted with Van Mieris’s paintings.[45] It also seems likelythat Sylvius actually introduced the artist to Cosimo. During the 1669 trip,
Cosimo collected the paintings he had ordered from Van Mieris the previous
year, likely The Sleeping Courtesan (fig 14) and The Quacksalver, both in the
Uffizi in Florence.[46] Van Mieris was not the only Leiden fijnschilder whom
Cosimo held in high esteem.[47] He also visited Gerrit Dou, from whom heprobably bought Woman Making Pancakes.[48] This notwithstanding, the future
Grand Duke seems to have been impressed most by Van Mieris, whom heengaged to produce another five paintings in the years after his return to

Fig 16. Frans van Mieris the
Elder, The Doctor’s Visit, 1667,
oil on panel, 44.5 x 31.1 cm,
The J. Paul Getty Museum, inv.
no. 86.PB.634.

Florence. Van Mieris was renowned for his self-portraits, such as the one in
The Leiden Collection in which he expresses surprise (fig 15). It is, thus, notsurprising that one of the paintings Cosimo ordered was a self-portrait for his
gallery of European celebrities.[49]Cornelis Paets and the Mysterious “Vredenburg”
While staying in Leiden, Cosimo also called on Cornelis Paets and took a tourof his splendid picture collection. He was particularly struck by “a cabinet
picture depicting a young lady in a swoon, along with a doctor, and an old
Fig 17. Frans van Mieris the© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 8 of 16

woman weeping” (fig 16).[50] Van Mieris had begun this painting in 1663. Inthat year French envoy Balthasar de Monconys had called on Van Mieris andfound him at work on it. He was astonished to hear that Van Mieris wanted

Elder, Portrait of Agatha Paets,
1665, oil on panel, 27 x 21.5
cm, Private Collection, UnitedStates.

1,200 guilders for the piece once it was completed.[51] According to
Houbraken, Paets had agreed to pay Van Mieris 6 guilders for every hour heworked on it (this is the famous Doctor’s Visit now in Los Angeles).[52] Thisagreement ultimately cost Paets a staggering 1,500 guilders, or 300 guilders
more than the already exorbitant initial amount. Cosimo was eager to acquire
the work and offered Paets twice as much for it, an enticement to which Paets
did not succumb.
Unfortunately, no inventory of Paets’s collection has been preserved.
Nevertheless, it enjoyed such renown that Cosimo visited his home on theBreestraat to see the works.[53] On this occasion Cosimo surely admired thestunning portrait of Agatha van Couwenhoven (fig 17), Paets’s wife, which
Van Mieris had painted in 1665 and which in Houbraken’s time was held tobe “one of his most skillful paintings in this country.”[54]Paets seems to have granted commissions primarily to Van Mieris. Indications
that he also served as an agent, like Sylvius, have not been found, althoughsuch a role cannot be definitively excluded. Van Mieris may have owed thecommission for the portrait of Allard van Couwenhoven, Agatha’s father, toCornelis Paets.[55] Paets was Van Mieris’s contemporary and had known him
since his youth. According to Houbraken, Paets was a fervent amateur painterand had received instruction in drawing from Van Mieris. Paets’s involvementwith and encouragement of painting (which had landed him in a deep crisis)
became apparent yet again shortly after Van Mieris’s death in 1681, when
Paets helped found a drawing academy.[56]The fourth patron mentioned by Houbraken in his Schouburgh is a certain“Vredenburg,” about whom he offers no further details. Since the only
“Vredenburg” living in Leiden after mid-century was the notary Willem van
Vredenburch (ca. 1621–64), he is generally assumed to be the individual
Houbraken had in mind. On first consideration, he does appear to be an
excellent candidate. The Dou follower Adriaen van Gaesbeeck (1621–50) was
Van Vredenburch’s brother-in-law and could have stimulated his interest
in fijnschilder art. On the other hand, however, the notary had neither an
extensive network of contacts nor the kind of wealth that would allow him tobuy paintings from Van Mieris on a regular basis.[57] In fact, it is doubtful
whether he was in a position to acquire even one work by Van Mieris; the four
Leiden estate owners with only a single work by the artist were, in any case,© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 9 of 16

much richer than Van Vredenburch.[58] The only other person from Leiden who
could vie for the designation “Maecenas” was the merchant Alexander deKoninck from Zeeland. In 1681 five undescribed paintings by Van Mieris hungin his house on the Nieuwe Rijn.[59]In light of all this, the “Vredenburg” cited by Houbraken was probably
someone who was not from Leiden. A suitable contender might be Gerard van
Vredenburch (ca. 1640–90), who came from a wealthy Rotterdam regent
family and was closely related to Cornelis Paets. Prior to his successful careerin the Rotterdam town council, Van Vredenburch had studied law in Leiden in
the early 1660s.[60] Upon his return to Rotterdam in 1665, he married Mariavan Couwenhoven, a first cousin of Agatha van Couwenhoven, the wife ofCornelis Paets.[61] Van Vredenburch surely knew Van Mieris’s portrait of
Agatha mentioned above, given that in May 1667 he was staying with Paets in
Leiden to witness the baptism of his nephew Allard Paets. He could also havebeen exposed to Van Mieris’s work through his uncle, namely Agatha’s
father, for the fabulously wealthy Allard van Couwenhoven had his likenesslimned by Van Mieris.[62] When the Rotterdam city secretary and owner ofmore than 140 pictures died in 1683, this portrait was in his house at the
Wijnhaven, together with works by Jan Both (1615/18–52), Balthasar van derHelst (1613–70), Rembrandt van Rijn (1606–69), and Jan Lievens (1607–74),
among others.[63] Van Vredenburch’s grandson, Willem Paets (1665–1740),
inherited the portrait, and it was returned to Leiden, where it hung—until Willem
was old enough—in the house of Cornelis Paets, doubtless in the vicinity of
Agatha’s likeness.[64] It is therefore entirely plausible that the “Vredenburg”
described by Houbraken was someone not from Leiden, but rather from
Rotterdam. Nevertheless, so long as information is lacking about the pictures
owned by Gerard van Vredenburch or other members of this wealthy
Rotterdam brewers’ family, this identification remains hypothetical.

- Piet Bakker, 2017

© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 10 of 16

Endnotes

1. See the essays Gerrit Dou and His Collectors in the Golden Age and Leiden Fijnschilders andthe Local Art Market in the Golden Age in this catalogue.
2. “Den Prins van zyne Leerlingen … de kroon van hun allen weg droeg.” Arnold Houbraken, De
groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, 3 vols. (Amsterdam,
1718–21; revised edition published in The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980) 3: 2.
3. Equally important for Van Mieris’s career was Cosimo III de’ Medici, Grand Duke of
Tuscany, but he can be discussed only briefly here. For his role as Van Mieris’s patron in the1670s, see the painter’s biography in this catalogue.
4. Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1:43.
5. See Tables 2 and 3 in the essay Leiden Fijnschilders and the Local Art Market in the Golden
Age in this catalogue.
6. Quentin Buvelot, “De reputatie van Frans van Mieris,” in Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van
Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C., National Gallery ofArt) (Zwolle, 2005), 15; Otto Naumann, “Frans van Mieris’ Personal Style,” in Frans van
Mieris 1635–1681, ed. Quentin Buvelot (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C.,
National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), 33.
7. Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis;
Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), 15, 104–6, no. 12.
8. Voor ’t werck van Dau beooght.” Cornelis de Bie, Het gulden cabinet van de edel vrij schilder
const, (Antwerp, 1661), 404.
9. “Beter als Douw.” Abraham Bredius, “Het Schilderregister van Jan Sysmus, Stads-Doctor
van Amsterdam,” Oud Holland 8 (1890): 8.
10. “François Miris. (…) disciple de Girard Dau (…) si ce n’est qu’il avoit un meilleur goût dedessein, plus de gentillesse dans ses Compositions, & plus de suavité encore dans sescouleurs (…),” in Roger de Piles, Abrégé de la vie des peintres, avec des reflexions sur leurs
ouvrages, et un Traité du peintre parfait; De la connoissance des desseins; De l’utilité desestampes (Paris, 1715), 430, cited in Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder(Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 192.
11. Gerard de Lairesse, Groot Schilderboeck (Amsterdam, 1707; English edition, London, 1778),
101, cited in Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1:
194.
12. See Tables 2 and 3 in the essay Leiden Fijnschilders and the Local Art Market in the Golden
Age in this catalogue. In addition to the Leiden estate inventories listed in Otto
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 11 of 16

Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 168, 170, 175, 189,
and Eric Jan Sluijter, “Schilders van ‘cleyne, subtile ende curieuse dingen’: Leidse
fijnschilders in contemporaine bronnen,” in Leidse Fijnschilders: van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van
Mieris de Jonge, 1630–1770, ed. Eric Jan Sluijter, Marlies Enklaar, and Paul Nieuwenhuizen(Exh. cat. Leiden, Museum De Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 39–40, and excluding theinventories in the main text, there are those of the cloth merchant Abraham le Pla andJohanna Mabuse (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary C. van Scharpenbrant,
inv. 1103, deed 35, 1673), in which are listed “een tafereel van een out mannetje dat een pen
versnyt” (a scene of an old man cutting a quill) and “Een out mannetje en wijffie om tafel”(An old man and woman at a table). See Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the
Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 2: 8, no. 2; 7, no. 1.
13. For the prices mentioned in written sources, see Otto Naumann, “Van Mieris, riant betaald
schilder,” Tableau 3 (1981): 649–56. For the various ways in which an asking price wasdetermined, see Eric Jan Sluijter, “Determining Value on the Art Market in the Golden Age:An Introduction,” in Art Market and Connoisseurship: A Closer Look at Paintings by
Rembrandt, Rubens, and Their Contemporaries, ed. Anna Tummers and Koenraad
Jonckheere (Amsterdam, 2008), 7–28.
14. Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen(Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition, The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980), 3:
3.
15. Gerard left behind a fortune worth 457,500 guilders in 1694. K. Zandvliet, De 250 rijksten vande Gouden Eeuw (Amsterdam, 2006), 143, no. 73.
16. Lunsingh Scheurleer, Theodoor Hermann, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, and A.J. van Dissel,
eds., Het Rapenburg: Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht (Leiden, 1989), 4: 439.
17. Gerard died in 1694, but his estate was divided only in 1697 (Stadsarchief Amsterdam,
Notarial Archives 4264, Notary D. van der Groe, fol. 1-52v, 27 August 1697). For a review
and a transcription of the entire estate inventory, see Lunsingh Scheurleer, Theodoor
Hermann, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, and A.J. van Dissel, eds., Het Rapenburg: Geschiedenis
van een Leidse gracht (Leiden, 1989), 4: 454–57, 494–508.
18. For an identification of the pictures, see Quentin Buvelot, “De reputatie van Frans van
Mieris,” in Frans van Mieris 1635–1681, ed. Quentin Buvelot (Exh. cat. The Hague,
Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), 18.
19. Examples of prices for the work of Van Mieris and Dou outside of Leiden are extremely rare.
In the 1674 stock inventory of Gerrit Uylenburgh is “een slapend vrouwtje” (a woman
sleeping) valued at 250 guilders (Abraham Bredius, Künstler-Inventare: Urkunden zur
Geschichte der holländischen Kunst des XVIten, XVIIten und XVIIIten Jahrhunderts [TheHague, 1915–22], 1570), and in the 1682 Amsterdam stock of Diego Duarte “een nacht metvier figuren en een lanterne keers en maenlicht, capitaal en curieus” (a noctural scene with© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 12 of 16

four figures and a candle lantern and moonlight, outstanding and meticulous) valued at 403
guilders, and “een cleynder syn conterfeytseltien op sen Italiaens gekleet spelende op een
Luyt” (a smaller one being a portrait [of a figure] dressed in Italian clothing playing a lute)valued at 170 guilders (Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder [Doornspijk,
1981], 1: 188).
20. Unless mentioned otherwise, the information on Sylvius is taken from: Evert H.
Baumann, Francois de le Boë Sylvius (Leiden, 1949), and G.E. Dann, “Beitrag zur Biographie
und Familiengeschichte des Leidener Professors Franz de la Boë Sylvius,” in Die Vorträge
der Hauptsammlung der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Geschichte der Pharmazie e.V.
während des Internationalen Pharmaziegeschichtlichen Kongresses in Rotterdam vom 17. –21. September 1963, ed. G.E. Dann (Stuttgart, 1965), 29–46.
21. Information on Abraham de Ligne and his family can be found in the Montias database in the
Frick Collection.
22. The original German reads: “Herrn Dr. Sylvio (…) Seine Erudition den Ruhm [brachte], dass er
seines gleichen in Holland und Teutschland nicht hätte. Alle grossen Herrn in Europa
bedienten sich seines Raths und schickten ihm grosse Geschenke.” See Max Hans Würzner,“Duitse studenten in de 17e eeuw te Leiden,” Leids Jaarboekje 67 (1975): 71. See also
Lunsingh Scheurleer, Theodoor Hermann, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, and A.J. van Dissel,
eds. Het Rapenburg: Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht (Leiden, 1988), 3a: 282.
23. H.D. Schepelern, ed., Olai Borrichii, Itineraiu 1660–1665: The Journal of the Danish
Polyhistor Ole Bloch (London, 1983), passim.
24. Borch in a letter dated 24 November 1661 to Th. Bartholinus, see Evert H. Baumann,
Francois de le Boë Sylvius (Leiden, 1949), 235n1.
25. Lunsingh Scheurleer, Theodoor Hermann, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, and A.J. van Dissel,
eds. Het Rapenburg: Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht (Leiden, 1988), 3a: 337.
26. The name Schlezer, rather than Schletzer, is used here because the former is used more
widely in the extensive English and German literature devoted to Margareta Lucretia’s father.
27. Unless mentioned otherwise, all of the information on Johann Friedrich Schlezer is taken
from: Peter Bahl, Der Hof des grossen Kurfürsten: Studien zur höheren Amtsträgerschaft
Brandenburg-Preussens (Cologne, 2001), 571–72
28. Album studiosorum academiae lugduno batavae (The Hague, 1875), 222.
29. Album studiosorum academiae lugduno batavae (The Hague, 1875), 264.
30. According to the Leiden marriage certificate, Margareta Lucretia was born in Kleve. A birthcertificate has not been preserved and so her date of birth can only be approximated. Herparents drew up their marriage settlement on 31 December 1641 in Utrecht (Utrechts Archief,
Notarial Archives, Notary F. Zwaerdecroon, inv. U028c001, deed 53, 31 December 1641) andwould have wed soon thereafter, in January 1642. Her parents were still without issue in© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 13 of 16

1644, since, again in Utrecht, they appointed guardians for their unborn children (Utrechts
Archief, Notarial Archives, Notary F. Zwaerdecroon, inv. U028a010, deed 106, 25 December1644). As her mother died there in 1648 (Utrechts Archief, Begraafregister, deed 123, p. 180),
Margareta Lucretia had to have been born between 1644 and 1648. She could thus also havebeen born before the nuptials of the elector, given that he resided primarily in Kleve as of1640 and her father would have found himself there regularly. Margareta Lucretia, in any
case, was still very young when she and Sylvius married in 1667, but her young age supports
the identification of the famous double portrait of Sylvius and his second wife in Dresden that
Frans van Mieris painted shortly after Margareta Lucretia’s death in 1669. On this portrait,
see Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 2: 101, no.
89.
31. When it was discovered in 1658 that Schlezer also worked for Sweden, he fell in disgracewith the Great Elector and had no choice but to enter into the service of the Swedish court,
after which little else was heard from him. In 1667 he was in Leiden to witness the marriage of
his daughter. Sylvius’s inventory drawn up in 1673 makes it clear that Schlezer was dead bythat time, therefore he must have passed away sometime between 1667 and that year.
32. Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 25; Quentin
Buvelot, ed., Frans van Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis; Washington,
D.C., National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), 18. See also the essay Gerrit Dou and His
Collectors in the Golden Age in this catalogue.
33. “Dikwerf [verzogt], dat al wat hy maakte voor hem mogt wezen, of hy keur hebben om het
zelve te naasten tot zoodanig een prys als ymant anders daar voor wilde geven.” Arnold
Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen(Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition, The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980), 3:
2.
34. That this expresses a desire rather than an actual situation is stated even more strongly by
Weyerman, who writes that Sylvius “dikmaals aan den jongen Konstschilder verzogt, om
alles het geene hy schilderde te moogen hebben, of ten minsten het te moogen naasten voor
de hoogste prijs die er iemant voor zou komen te bieden” (regularly requested the young
painter to be allowed to have everything that he painted, or at least be able to take it over forthe highest price that someone would offer for it). Jacob Campo Weyerman, De levensbeschryvingen der Nederlantsche konstschilders en konstschilderessen (The Hague, 1729),
342.
35. For instance, in Leiden in 1674 the heirs of Sylvius were taxed on a capital of 25,000 guilders,just like Gerrit Dou. For the sake of comparison: in that year Cornelis Paets was taxed on acapital of 82,000 guilders, and Isaac Gerard on 61,000 (Gerrit Jan Peltjes, Leidse Lasten,twee belastingkohieren uit 1674 [Leiden, 1995]). At his death in 1694, the latter left behind a
fortune of 457,500 guilders. K. Zandvliet, De 250 rijksten van de Gouden Eeuw: kaptiaal,© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 14 of 16

macht, familie en levensstijl (Amsterdam, 2006), 143, no. 73.
36. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary L. van Overmeer, inv. 969, deed 8, 14
December 1669: “Het conterfeytsel van de overledenen [ = Francois Gomarus en Susanna
Goethals] van Mieris” (The likeness of the deceased [= Francois Gomarus and Susanna
Goethals] by Van Mieris). Portrait of Florentius Schuyl, 1666, is the Mauritshuis, The Hague.
See Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 2: no. 63;
Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis;
Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), no. 37.
37. Pieter Biesboer, Collections of Paintings in Haarlem: 1572–1745 (Los Angeles, 2001), 343,
no. 12.
38. The inventory also mentions “een mansportraitje” (a portrait of a man) and a self-portrait by
Van Mieris. Also listed were “een oudemans portraitje boven ovael” (a portrait of an old man
arched at the top) by Dou, an amorous couple by Carel de Moor, and a portrait of a woman
by Willem van Mieris. Not a single work by these artists occurs in other Haarlem estate
inventories, with the exception of two pieces by Dou in the 1694 stock inventory of Cornelis
Dusart, but this was most likely by a follower.
39. Susanna Claessens’s sister was Barbara Maria Claessens, the wife of Jan van Pradellis, acloth manufacturer in Leiden. They were the grandparents of Maria Justina Kraij, living in
Haarlem, whose parents were Abraham Kraij, Lord of Idewalle and burgomaster of the
Zeeuwse Sluijs, and Maria van Pradellis.
40. E. H. Baumann, Francois de le Boë Sylvius (Leiden, 1949), 15.
41. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary P.A. Scharpenbrant, inv. 1102, deed 19,
2 January 1672.
42. “Door de gunst van gemelden Heer zynen Mecenas [Sylvius]”; “een schoon Vrouwtje
staande

in

een

Zyde

Stoffewinkel,

ennevens

de

zelve

een

Ruiter.”ArnoldHoubraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen(Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition, The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980), 3:
3; this is The Cloth Shop, 1660 (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna); Otto Naumann, Frans
van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 24; 2: 33–35, no. 31.
43. According to Sandrart, the Archduke even paid 2,000 guilders for the painting; see Otto
Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 24
44. G.J. Hoogewerff, De twee reizen van Cosimo de Medici Prins van Toscane door de
Nederlanden (1667–1669) (Amsterdam, 1919).
45. In a letter to Cosimo, Sylvius thanks the Grand Duke for having honored him with a visit to his
house while sojourning in Leiden. G. J. Hoogewerff, De twee reizen van Cosimo de’ Medici
Prins van Toscane door de Nederlanden (1667–1669), Amsterdam, 1919, 393–94.
46. Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 2: 13–14, no. 9;© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 15 of 16

89–91, no. 75.
47. Horst Gerson, Ausbreitung und Nachwirkung der holländischen Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts(Haarlem, 1942, reprinted in Amsterdam, 1983), 179–84.
48. Woman Making Pancakes, ca. 1650–55 (Uffizi Gallery, Florence); Ronni Baer, “The Paintingsof Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” (PhD diss. New York University, 1990), no. A 61.
49. On the five works that he bought, see note 24 in the biography of Frans van Mieris in thiscatalogue. See Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague,
Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art) (Zwolle, 2005), 215n60.
50. “Een Kabinetstukje, waar in verbeeld word een jong Juffertje dat in een flaaute leit, nevens
een Medecynmeester en een schreijende oude Vrouw.” Arnold Houbraken, De grooteschouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen (Amsterdam, 1718–21;
revised edition, The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980), 3: 4.
51. Abraham Bredius, “17e Eeuwsche reisherinneringen: Journal des Voyages de Monsieur deMonconys etc.etc. Paris 1677,” Nederlandsche Kunstbode (1881): 413.
52. Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 2: 84–87, no. I
71.
53. At the marriage of his brother Jacob in Leiden in 1675, Cornelis Paets gave the Breestraat as
his address.
54. “Een van zyn konstigste Penceelkonst die hier te Land is.” Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van
Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C., National Gallery ofArt) (Zwolle, 2005), 169–74, nos. 35–36.
55. See the discussion on “Vredenburg” below.
56. Piet Bakker, De Vrije Fries: Verdwenen maar niet vergeten: Themanummer rond de opheffing
van de Academie van Franeker in 1811 (Leeuwarden, 2011), 264–65.
57. In 1674, about ten year’s after Van Vredenburch’s death, his widow was taxed on a capital
estimated between 5,000 and 6,000 guilders. Gerrit Jan Peltjes, Leidse Lasten: Tweebelastingkohieren uit 1674 (Leiden, 1995), 52.
58. In 1674 the cloth merchants Jan Adriaensz le Pla (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial
Archives 1404, deed 44, 1687) and Gerrit van Hoochmade (Regionaal Archief Leiden,
Notarial Archives 1002, deed 6, 1683), and the heirs of the medical doctor Franciscus
Gomarus (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives 969, deed 8, 1669) were taxed for
80,000, 45,000 and 25,000 guilders, respectively. See Gerrit Jan Peltjes, Leidse Lasten:
Twee belastingkohieren uit 1674 (Leiden, 1995), passim. Information on the wealth of acolleague of Gomarus, Johannes van der Spelt, who died in 1664, is not available. In addition
to a portrait by Van Mieris, Van der Spelt owned a bond worth 200 guilders in the name of thepainter (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives 984, deed 61, 1665). The doctor’s© 2024 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 16 of 16

brother was Adriaen van der Spelt, the still-life painter with whom Van Mieris collaborated on
at least one occasion (Adriaen van der Spelt and Frans van Mieris, Trompe l’Oeil with a
Garland of Flowers and a Curtain, signed A. van der Spelt, 1658 [The Art Institute ofChicago]; see also: Quentin Buvelot, ed., Frans van Mieris 1635–1681 (Exh. cat. The Hague,
Mauritshuis; Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art) [Zwolle, 2005], 117–19, no. 16). This
painting was the property of the brewer Henric Bugge van Ring, in whose estate inventory(Regionaal Archief Leiden,, Notarial Archives 1005, deed 10, 1667), in addition to a country
house, so much real estate is mentioned that his fortune would have equaled if not surpassed
that of Le Pla.
59. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary L. Leffen, inv. 1264, deed 55, 4 May
1681.
60. Album studiosorum academiae lugduno batavae (The Hague, 1875), 473.
61. For the Van Vredenburch and Van Couwenhoven families, their mutual relationships, andposition in Rotterdam’s regent patriciate, see E.A. Engelbrecht, De Vroedschap van
Rotterdam 1572–1795 (Rotterdam, 1973), passim. Judging from the will of Gerard van
Vredenburg of 1667, the wealth was primarily from his wife’s family. In the reciprocal will, inthe event that she died first, she left her family 110,000 guilders in real estate, and Van
Vredenburg “a mere” 20,000 guilders. The amounts would devolve to both families upon thedeath of the survivor (Gemeente Archief Rotterdam, Notarial Archives, Notary J. Delphius,
inv. 363, deed 356/1305, 11 December 1667).
62. Een Conterfeytsel van Dhr A van Couwenhoven za: van Miris (“A likeness of the late Mr A.
van Couwenhoven by Van Mieris”) (Gemeente Archief Rotterdam, Notarial Archives, notary
Johannes Bordels, inv. 1300, [unpag.] 27 July 1683). Allard van Couwenhoven was married
to the daughter of the brewer Jacob Jacobsz van Couwenhoven (1592–1661), who left afortune worth 220,000 guilders in 1661. K. Zandvliet, De 250 rijksten van de Gouden Eeuw:
kaptiaal, macht, familie en levensstijl (Amsterdam, 2006), 353, no. 216. A share wasbequeathed to his granddaughter Maria van Couwenhoven, the wife of Gerard van
Vredenburch.
63. Otto Naumann, Frans van Mieris (1635–1681) the Elder (Doornspijk, 1981), 1: 189. See:
Albertus Welcker, “Johannes Ruyscher alias Jonge Hercules,” Oud Holland 50 (1933): 29.
The pictures in this extensive bequest are listed in a separate category in Gemeente Archief
Rotterdam, Notarial Archives, notary. Johannes Bordels, inv. 1300, (unpag.), 27 July 1683.
64. All of the paintings, with the exception of the portraits, were auctioned in Rotterdam on 20
September 1683. The portraits, including the one by Van Mieris, devolved to Cornelis Paets
as the guardian of his two children, Willem and Elisabeth. Gemeente Archief Rotterdam,
Notarial Archives, Notary Johannes Bordels, inv. 1300, Settlement of the Estate, 27 July
1683, Settlement of the Estate.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection