Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Godefridus Schalcken(Made 1643 – 1706 The Hague)1682
oil on copper
48.2 x 37.8 cm
signed in dark paint, upper left corner: “G.
Schalcken.”
GS-102© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 2 of 11

How to cite
Jansen, Guido. “Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 3rd ed. Edited by Arthur
K. Wheelock Jr. and Lara Yeager-Crasselt. New York, 2020–23. https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/ (archived
December 2023).
A PDF of every version of this entry 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

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 3 of 11

A sumptuously dressed man in the prime of his life is portrayed three-quarter-length,

Comparative Figures

seated in a wooded landscape, turned toward the right. He wears an allonge perruque,a periwig with flowing blond curls that cover his chest. A magnificently decorated
cloak in blue and gold-brown is draped around his upper body over his white linen
shirt, with elaborate lace trim at the neck. His right hand is placed on his thigh while
his left hand rests on a dead hare. In the right background, a stag flees from a hunting
hound bounding through the woods.
When the Amsterdam art dealer Pieter de Boer acquired this painting from a private
collection in Germany in 2004, the identity of the sitter was still completely unknown.
Soon afterward, however, the present author identified the man as Barthout van
Slingelandt (1654–1711) on the basis of a drawing made by Mattheus Verheyden(1700–77) around 1733–35 (fig 1).[1] Verheyden’s drawing is an allegorizing
interpretation of the portrait that he patterned after a series of similar sheets in the socalled Slingelandt Album, preserved in the archives of the High Council of Nobles in
The Hague (fig 2).[2] In this drawing, a bust-length depiction of Barthout van
Slingelandt is placed within an oval frame on a pedestal and in a marble entablature
bearing the arms of Dordrecht (upper left) and Zuid-Holland (upper right). Below
these coats of arms are emblems representing the Munt (the Mint) and the Rotterdam

Fig 1. Mattheus Verheyden, Portraitof Barthout van Slingelandt(1654–1711), ca. 1733–35, black
chalk, heightened with white, on graypaper, 43.5 x 32.5 cm, present
whereabouts unknown (formerlycollection Van Tets van
Goidschalxoord, Doorn, 1970), photo
RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische
Documentatie/Netherlands Institutefor Art History), neg. no. E 663

chamber of the West India Company (WIC), and personifications of Commerce andJustice—references to the most important posts held by the sitter. The oval frame iscrowned with Barthout’s coat of arms: two fesses embattled-counter-embattled argent
in a sable field.
Aside from the identification of the sitter, the inscription on Verheyden’s drawing
provides important information about the sitter’s age and the dating of the painting. It
reads: Hr. Barthout van Slingelandt, Hr. Govertsz: VrijHeer van Slingelandt, etc. Ætatis
28. Ao. 1682. Obiit 1711. In other words, Barthout was 28 when Schalcken painted his
portrait in 1682. In terms of style, the painting fits perfectly into this period of
Schalcken’s oeuvre, and Verheyden had no need to speculate about the year because
he could have consulted family records.[3]Barthout’s choice of Godefridus Schalcken as his portraitist was an obvious one. In
1678 Barthout’s father, Govert van Slingelandt (1623–90), then at the height of his
power as secretary to the Council of State in The Hague, commissioned Schalcken,
the most important master of his native city, to paint his portrait.[4] Civic patriotism
certainly played a role in this commission. The Van Slingelandts were an old andproud family whose members had always pursued their successful careers from theirpower base in Dordrecht. The oldest city of Holland, Dordrecht was privileged inbeing the first among the cities in the States Assembly. Remaining true to the Van

Fig 2. Mattheus Verheyden, Portraitof Barthout van Slingelandt(1654–1711), ca. 1733–35, wash
drawing in pen and gray ink,
heightened with red, 238 x 151 mm,
Hoge Raad van Adel, The Hague, Van
Slingelandt Archive, inv. no. 120A,
photo RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische
Documentatie/Netherlands Institutefor Art History), neg. no. 30124© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 4 of 11

Slingelandt tradition, in 1682 Barthout became a member of the Old Council(Oudraad) of Dordrecht, the most important governing body of the city.[5] It was no
coincidence that he chose Schalcken to paint his portrait in the first year of his
governmental career.
Verheyden copied not only Barthout’s portrait but also its pendant, the portrait of his
wife, Elisabeth van Bleiswijck (1663–1728), whom Barthout married in Pijnacker inJanuary 1684 (fig 3). Of this picture, too, Verheyden made an allegorizing
interpretation, patterned after the other sheets intended for the Slingelandt Album.[6]The inscription reveals that Schalcken painted her in 1685 when she was 23 years old(fig 4). These two paintings thus originated three years apart. The couple had threesons: Govert (1692–1776), Bertout (1694–1752), and Hendrik (1702–59). Hendrik
had a strong interest in genealogy, and it was he who asked Verheyden, active in The
Hague, to make drawn copies of the family portraits and to produce the sheets
comprising the Slingelandt Album.[7]Hendrik served for years as a magistrate and burgomaster of The Hague. His eldest
brother, Govert, was burgomaster of Dordrecht; as the eldest son, he had inherited not
only this patrimonial office but also the most important family portraits.[8] Only whenFig 3. Mattheus Verheyden, Portrait
of Elisabeth van Bleiswijck(1663–1728), ca. 1733–35, black
chalk, heightened with white, on graypaper, 435 x 325 mm, present
whereabouts unknown (formerlycollection Van Tets van
Goidschalxoord, Doorn, 1970), photo
RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische
Documentatie/Netherlands Institutefor Art History), neg. no. E 664

he died without male issue did the ancestral portraits end up in the possession ofHendrik’s eldest son, Barthout van Slingelandt (1731–98). He transferred them to his
country house Zuijdwindt near ’s-Gravenzande, which he had inherited from his
grandmother Elisabeth van Bleiswijck. It was there, in 1808, after the death ofBarthout’s second wife, Magdalena Anna Elisabeth van Boetzelaer (1756–1808), thatan inventory was drawn up that listed “eighteen family portraits of the Van
Slingelandts, each of which bears an inscription on the back with the name and thetime of birth of the sitter.”[9] Hanging in the house at this time was the family
heirloom, painted in 1657 by Jan Mijtens (1614–70), which portrayed the apparently
flourishing family of Govert van Slingelandt (fig 5).[10] This group portrait includes a
posthumous depiction of Barthout’s mother, Christina van Beveren (1631–56); sheand her daughter, Christina, died when the infant boy was only two years old.
The subsequent fate of the collection of family portraits is unclear. Shortly after
1811, Zuijdwindt was sold by its heirs and eventually demolished, probably becauseof financial losses in the Napoleonic era. The portraits were then probably inheritedby Hendrik van Slingelandt Barthoutsz (1788–1868). Shortly thereafter, some ofthem were dispersed, possibly having been sold, as can be deduced from the fact thatin 1842 the portraits Schalcken made of Barthout’s father, Govert, and his second
wife, Arnoudina van Beaumont (1635–1702), in 1678 were in the famous collection

Fig 4. Mattheus Verheyden, Portrait
of Elisabeth van Bleiswijck(1663–1728), ca. 1733–35, wash
drawing in pen and gray ink,
heightened with red, 240 x 152 mm,
Hoge Raad van Adel, The Hague, Van
Slingelandt Archive, inv. no. 143A,
photo RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische
Documentatie/Netherlands Institutefor Art History), neg. no. 30125

of Baron Johan Gijsbert Verstolk van Soelen (1776–1845) in The Hague.[11] No otherportrait of a member of this branch of the Van Slingelandt family has ever been
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 5 of 11

traced to this period, so it seems most likely that the heirs divided up the collection
privately or sold it, perhaps to relatives. It therefore came as a complete surprisewhen Schalcken’s portrait of Barthout appeared in late 2004. One can only hope thatits pendant of Elisabeth van Bleiswijck will one day surface as well.
Schalcken portrayed Barthout in an unusual way, presenting him as a participant in
the hunt. Even more telling than the dead hare is the scene in the background of ahound chasing a stag (in terms of large game, wild boar had disappeared from
Holland by the sixteenth century). Hunting of this kind had traditionally been
reserved for the sovereign ruler, first the counts of Holland, and then later the[12]

stadholders, as “chief foresters” (opperhoutvesters),

whereas hunting of small furrygame (hares and rabbits) and feathered game (pheasants, partridges and ducks) was
rated less highly.[13] Hunting was the only exclusively noble privilege left to this oldelite.[14] The nobility of Holland had the right to hunt small game in the “Wilderness,”

Fig 5. Jan Mijtens, Portrait of Govert
van Slingelandt (1623–1690), Lord ofDubbeldam, with His First Wife
Christina van Beveren (1631–1656),
1657, oil on canvas, 99.5 x 86.5 cm,
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, SKA-4013

which comprised the woods and dunes between the Meuse River and Zijpe polder andseveral adjoining areas belonging to the former domains of the counts of Holland.
The Wilderness, officially called the “Forestry” (Houtvesterij) of Holland and West
Friesland, was also the only hunting ground of consequence in this province.[15]Members of the nobility were forced to share their hunting privileges with the highest
officials in the provincial government. Supervision of the hunt in the count’s former
Wilderness was the responsibility of one of the oldest courts of the land: the Councilof Woodward and Master Servants (Houtvester en Meesterknapen). They were charged
with issuing hunting licenses and with administering justice in all hunt-related cases.
Stag hunting with hounds in the Forestry of Holland was, therefore, a highly exclusive
pastime and a pleasure reserved mainly for the nobility.
The inclusion of the hunting scene makes it clear that Barthout van Slingelandt had
himself portrayed as a nobleman, although he might better be described as someone
with noble pretensions. If indeed he participated in the stag hunt, he could have done
so in the vicinity of his own home only in the dunes between The Hague andScheveningen and in the woods known as the Haagse Bos, hunting grounds supervisedby the Forestry.[16] Schalcken’s portrait, therefore, provides insight into thearistocratization of the wealthy urban regents, among whom the Van Slingelandts
could be counted (though it must be admitted that Barthout’s mother, Christina van
Beveren, was a descendant of an old knightly family of Holland).
After the death of his father in 1690, Barthout became Lord of Dubbeldam, but thistitle of nobility did not gain him admittance to Holland’s College of Nobles, nor did it
grant him the rights to vote in the States assembly and to hunt in the Wilderness.
Deriving from a collateral branch of the family, the ownership of the seigneury of
Slingelandt in the Alblasserwaard polder had fallen to the Pompe (van Meerdervoort© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 6 of 11

en Slingelandt) family, likewise from Dordrecht. It must therefore have been a great
triumph for Barthout and his family when, in 1705, he purchased from his cousin
Isabella Jacoba Pompe van Slingelandt (1657–1718) the seigneurial rights that madehim Lord of Slingelandt. There was no greater sign of prestige for the nobility, andthe regents’ families who sought to associate with them, than the possession of aseigneury or barony from which the owner derived his family name.[17] Moreover,Slingelandt was a so-called free or high barony, which increased his standing evenmore, since the owner possessed not only the usual right to tithe and all rights
connected with hunting and fishing, but also the right to administer corporalpunishment and even the right to condemn and execute criminals.[18]When this portrait was painted, only the seigneury of Dubbeldam was in the family’s
possession, but high offices had been held by members of the family for generations.
After studying law in Leiden, in 1677 Barthout began his career as a counselor at the
Court of Holland. His most important positions were magistrate and burgomaster of
Dordrecht, master-general of the mint of the United Netherlands, councilor anddeputy to the Admiralty on the Meuse, treasurer-general of the province of ZuidHolland, governor of the Dutch West India Company, and member of the Council ofState. With regard to the family’s rise in standing, its elevation to the nobility by
Emperor Joseph I in 1702 was of immense importance. Both Barthout and his halfbrother Govert Johan (1665–1703) were henceforth allowed to bear the hereditary
title of Baron of the Holy Roman Empire, a title that had no legal significance in the
Republic of the Seven United Netherlands, but nevertheless added great luster to thefamily name. It is therefore interesting to note that the aspirations displayed byBarthout van Slingelandt in Schalcken’s splendid portrait of 1682 indeed came tofruition twenty years later.

- Guido Jansen, 2017

© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 7 of 11

Endnotes
1. The period in which Mattheus Verheyden worked for the Van Slingelandt family is based on a numberof drawings in the family archive kept at the Hoge Raad van Adel (High Council of Nobles) in The
Hague. These include the drawings, signed by Verheyden and dated 1733, of the gold goblet presented
in 1702 by Frederick I, King of Prussia, to Barthout van Slingelandt. See also the two portrait drawings
Verheyden made of his patron Hendrik van Slingelandt Barthoutsz (1702–59) and his wife, Maria
Catharina van der Burch (1707–61), for the so-called Slingelandt Album, both signed in full and dated
1735; J. C. Kort, Het archief van de familie Van Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), 18, inv.
no. 248, figs. 5 and 6. The portraits are also reproduced in Charles Dumas and H. P. R. Rosenberg, eds.,
Het Kabinet der Koningin: Geschiedenis van het instituut en het huis aan de Korte Vijverberg (’sGravenhage, 1991), 183. This black-chalk drawing, heightened with white, on gray paper is still in thepossession of the sitter’s descendants. The drawing measures 43.5 x 32.5 cm and was to be found in1970 in Doorn in the possession of Constance Hooft, dowager of Gerard Frederik van Tets van
Goidschalxoord. Jacob van Slingelandt, the last descendant of Barthout’s branch of the family, died in
1878. A sister of his, Catharina (1819–58), was married to Jacob George Hieronymus van Tets
(1812–85), and the drawn copies of the portraits were inherited by their grandson Gerard Frederik(1875–1968); see “Van Tets,” Nederland’s adelsboek 95 (2010): 148. The Barony of Goidschalxoord in
the Hoekse Waard polder actually came into the family in 1758, when Barthout van Slingelandt
Hendriksz (1731–98) married Margaretha Berck (1730–86), Lady of Goidschalxoord. In fact, it was
through this branch of the family that a deplorably bad, partial copy of Schalcken’s portrait, painted byCornelis van Cuylenburg (1758–1827) around 1802, was passed down to later generations. This portrait
and its pendant were bequeathed fairly recently to the Simon van Gijn Museum in Dordrecht (oil oncanvas, affixed to panel, 52 x 46 cm, oval).
2. These wash drawings measure 24 x 15 cm; two identical specimens are preserved at the Hoge Raad vanAdel, Archief van Slingelandt, inv. no. 120A–120B, one signed and one unsigned; J. C. Kort, Hetarchief van de familie Van Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), 10. Thanks to the two
drawings (figs. 1 and 2), the portrait was known to Moes and Hofstede de Groot, who duly recorded it(see References). Following Hofstede de Groot, Beherman included it in his list of works. None of themknew the original.
3. The notarial approval of 1741 that accompanies the gilt drawings that Verheyden made of the gold
goblet in 1733 is probably unique (see note 1). In this document, the notary officially declares that theartist portrayed everything in a true-to-life manner; J. C. Kort, Het archief van de familie Van
Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), 121 appendix B, no. 1.
4. Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988), 189, no. 90 (oil on copper, 41.5 x 32.5 cm),
present whereabouts unknown. Schalcken’s preparatory drawing (made in 1678) for this portrait and thedrawing Verheyden made after it are also preserved in the Slingelandt Archive and were published by© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 8 of 11

the present author in Guido Jansen, “Additions to Godfried Schalcken’s Oeuvre as a Draftsman,”Hoogsteder-Naumann Mercury 13–14 (1992): 74–75, with illustrations. As a sign of civic patriotism, it isenough to point out the Grote Kerk of Dordrecht in the background of the portrait. By this time Govert
van Slingelandt had been living for more than 20 years in The Hague, where Barthout was in fact born.
The Van Slingelandt family probably paid the artist 50 guilders per portrait. This price can be deduced
from the 100 guilders that Cornelis de Jonge van Ellemeet (1646–1721) paid in 1698 in The Hague forthe life-size oval portraits of himself and his wife, Maria Oyens (1647–1732); see B. E. de Muink, Een
regentenhuishouding omstreeks 1700 (’s-Gravenhage, 1965), 178.
5. In other cities of Holland this governing body was called the vroedschap (town council).
6. This portrait likewise exists in two identical versions, one signed and one unsigned. They were executedin the same technique and have the same measurements as the drawings described in note 3; Hoge Raadvan Adel, Archief van Slingelandt, inv. no. 143A–143B. See J. C. Kort, Het archief van de familie Van
Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), 11.
7. On the family, see “Van Slingelandt,” Nederland’s adelsboek 93 (2008): 199–226. See J. C. Kort, Hetarchief van de familie Van Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004) for Hendrik’s great interest in
genealogy; see also note 1. His father, Barthout, had actually been the first to show such an interest, as
evidenced by his purchase in 1696 of two manuscript volumes of the Trophées de Brabant by thegenealogist Christoforus Butkens (1590–1650).
8. This is apparent from, for example, the caption to the print that Jacobus Houbraken (1698–1780) madebetween 1752 and 1759 of Schalcken’s portrait of Govert van Slingelandt, Barthout’s father: “na ’t
Schilderij, berustende onder den Vrijheer van Slingelandt, te Dordrecht” (after the painting in thepossession of the Lord of Slingelandt, at Dordrecht). The print served as an illustration to Jan
Wagenaar’s 21-volume project Vaderlandsche Historie. Alexander VerHuell, Jacobus Houbraken et son
oeuvre (Arnhem, 1875) 72, no. 386. The family archive also contains a noteworthy document of ca.
1750–70, the opening words of which read: “Portraitten, die de Heer A. Schouman zoude kunnen
tykenen na de originele hangende bij den Vrij-Heer van Slingelandt te Dordrecht” (Portraits that Mr. A.
Schouman could perhaps draw after the originals hanging in the house of the Baron of Slingelandt in
Dordrecht). The document mentions a portrait of Barthout, but does not name the painter; J. C. Kort,
Het archief van de familie Van Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), inv. no. 23.
9. “Achttien stuks famillepourtraitten van het geslagt van Slingelandt, op ieder van welke van agteren denamen en de tijd der geboorte der pourtraitten zijn vermeld.” Cornelis Hofstede de Groot,“Schilderijenverzamelingen van het geslacht Slingelandt,” Oud Holland 10 (1892): 233; see also J. C.
Kort, Het archief van de familie Van Slingelandt 1438–1868 (’s-Gravenhage, 2004), 11, inv. no. 315 III,
fol. 193. I am indebted to Egbert Wolleswinkel, secretary to the Hoge Raad van Adel, for checking the
document published by Hofstede de Groot.
10. Alexandra Nina Bauer, Jan Mijtens (1613/14–1670): Leben und Werk (Petersberg, 2006), 261–62, no.
A-138 with illustration.
11. In 1842 these paintings were included as Grand Pensioner de Witt and The Wife of the Preceding in the© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 9 of 11

supplement of the list drawn up by John Smith of Schalcken’s works as being in the collection“Verstolke de Soelen” [sic]; see John Smith, Supplement to the Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the
Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish, and French Painters (London, 1829–42), 590, nos. 9 and 10. Both portraits
were described, still with the correct identifications, in “Het kunstkabinet van Z. E. den Baron Verstolk
van Soelen,” De Nederlandsche Kunst-Spiegel 1 (1844–45): 92. In 1846 this collection was purchased
privately by three English gentlemen, after which the portrait of Govert van Slingelandt ended up, via
Thomas Baring, in the collection of the Earl of Northbrook (as Portrait of De Witt), and the portrait ofArnoudina van Beaumont in the collection of Mr. Chaplin (as Portrait of a Lady). It is remarkable,
nevertheless, that when Jean Paul Richter and James Weale catalogued the collection of the Earl ofNorthbrook in 1889, they noted that before Verstolk came into the possession of the portrait of Govert
van Slingelandt, it had been in “a Collection in Amsterdam.” See Jean Paul Richter and William H. J.
Weale, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Collection of Pictures Belonging to the Earl of Northbrook(London, 1889), 68, no. 95. It has not proved possible to find the source of this information.
12. In fact the duties of the office were carried out by a “Lieutenant Woodward” (Luitenant-Houtvester); J.
C. Beth, “Het jachtrecht in Holland,” Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde 7(1928): 95–112; Jaap Buis, Historia forestis: Nederlandse bosgeschiedenis, vol. 1: Bosgebruik, bosbeheerenboswetgeving tot het midden van de negentiende eeuw (Utrecht, 1985), 240–41, 294–96; Antheun Janse,
Ridderschap in Holland: Portret van een adellijke elite in de late middeleeuwen (Hilversum, 2009), 352.
13. Ignaz B. M. Matthey, Vincken moeten vincken locken: Vijf eeuwen vangst van zangvogels en kwartels in
Holland (Haarlem and Hilversum, 2002), 219; Antheun Janse, Ridderschap in Holland: Portret van een
adellijke elite in de late middeleeuwen (Hilversum, 2009), 347.
14. Jaap Buis, Historia forestis: Nederlandse bosgeschiedenis, vol. 1: Bosgebruik, bosbeheeren boswetgeving tot
het midden van de negentiende eeuw (Utrecht, 1985), 333; K. F. van Nierop, Van ridders tot
regenten (Amsterdam, 1990), 47; Antheun Janse, Ridderschap in Holland: Portret van een adellijke elitein de late middeleeuwen (Hilversum, 2009), 344–53 (chapter 7.4 “De jacht als statussymbool”).
15. For a detailed description of the territories under the jurisdiction of the Forestry of Holland, see J. C.
Beth, “Het jachtrecht in Holland,” Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde 7(1928): 95–112; see also Ignaz B. M. Matthey, Vincken moeten vincken locken: Vijf eeuwen vangst van
zangvogels en kwartels in Holland (Haarlem and Hilversum, 2002), 220. Only in 1716 was it decreed thatburgomasters and town councilors of the cities entitled to vote in the provincial assembly known as theStates of Holland were permitted to take part in the noble hunt in the Forestry.
16. Jaap Buis, Historia forestis: Nederlandse bosgeschiedenis, vol. 1: Bosgebruik, bosbeheeren boswetgeving tot
het midden van de negentiende eeuw (Utrecht, 1985), 329–33.
17. H. K. F. van Nierop, Van ridders tot regenten (Amsterdam, 1990), 156.
18. Antheun Janse, Ridderschap in Holland: Portret van een adellijke elite in de late middeleeuwen(Hilversum, 2009), 146–69.

© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 10 of 11

Provenance
Barthout van Slingelandt (1654-1711); by descent to his son Govert van Slingelandt (1692-1776); by
descent to his nephew Barthout van Slingelandt Hendriksz (1731-1798); by descent to his heirs between
1811 and 1840.
Private collection, Germany, by November 2004.
[Kunsthandel P. de Boer B. V., Amsterdam, 2005].
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History
Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, “Godefridus Schalcken: Painted Seduction,” 25 September
2015–24 January 2016; Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum, 21 February–26 June 2016 [lent by the present
owner].
Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer: Masterpiecesof The Leiden Collection,” 28 March 2018–22 July 2018 [lent by the present owner].
St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer: Masterpieces of
The Leiden Collection,” 5 September 2018–13 January 2019 [lent by the present owner].

References
Moes, Ernst Wilhelm. Iconographia Batava: Beredeneerde lijst van geschiderde en gebeeld-houwde
portretten van Noord-Nederlanders in vorige eeuwen. 2 vols. Amsterdam, 1897–1905, 2: no. 7274, 1.
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch Painters of
the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work of John Smith. Edited and translated by Edward G. Hawke, 5:400, no. 324. 8 vols. London, 1907–28. Originally published as Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis
der Werke der hervorragendsten höllandischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen andParis, 1907–28.
Jansen, Guido. “Porträt des Barthout Govertsz. Van Slingelandt, 1682.” In Schalcken – Gemalte
Verführung. Edited by Anja K. Sevcik, 209–12, no. 47. Exh. cat. Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum;
Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum. Stuttgart, 2015.
McCarthy, Alexa. “Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt.” In The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina Lyubimova, 204–5; 246, no. 69. Translated by© 2024 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Portrait of Barthout van Slingelandt
Page 11 of 11

Daria Babich and Daria Kuzina. Exh. cat. Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts; St.
Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. Moscow, 2018.
Franits, Wayne. Godefridus Schalcken: A Late 17th-century Dutch Painter in Pursuit of Fame andFortune. London, 2023, 75–76, fig. 41; 143n113.

Technical Summary
The support, a rectangular sheet of rolled copper, has substantial weight and does not flex when handled. A
brown priming has been applied to the reverse by wide brush. A two-line, horizontally oriented, indistinct
inscription is centered along the upper half of the primed reverse. There are no wax collection seals, labels,
stencils or import stamps.
The copper support is sandwiched between a two-part support system. It rests on a wooden strainer that isslightly larger than the copper in both directions. Four L-shaped wooden liner members, which are secured tothe strainer tacking edges with screws, sandwich the copper between the strainer and liner members.[1]A light blue-gray ground has been thinly applied. Vertical brushwork through the figure’s face and curls
suggests the ground or an underlayer was applied with vertical strokes. The handling of the paint is delicate
and blended. The paint has been applied extremely smoothly with glazes through the figure’s flesh tones andcurls. Even areas of highlight through the brocade are applied with extremely low rounded brushwork.
Extremely fine brushstrokes define the hare’s whiskers and fur.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images captured at 780–1000 nanometers, and nocompositional changes are visible in the images or as pentimenti.
The painting is signed in dark paint along the background in the upper left corner but is undated.
The painting has not undergone conservation treatment since its acquisition in 2005 and remains in a goodstate of preservation, although a fine network of craquelure has formed through brown passages, and a small
indentation along the right vertical edge may be due to a nail applied to the reverse during past framing.[2]Technical Summary Endnotes

1. Only the lower and right frame-liner members were removed during examination.
2. Indentation is 10 cm down from the upper edge, approximately 1 cm in from the right edge.

© 2024 The Leiden Collection