Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelightca. 1664–65

Dominicus van Tol(Bodegraven? ca. 1635 – 1676 Leiden)

oil on panel
30 x 23.3 cm
DT-100Currently on view at: Sterling and Francine
Clark Art Institute, Williamstown, MA© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 2 of 11

How To Cite
Aono, Junko. "Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight." In The Leiden Collection Catalogue. Edited by Arthur
K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017.
https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/.
This page is available on the site's Archive. PDF of every version of this page is available on the Archive,
and the Archive is managed by a permanent URL. Archival copies will never be deleted. New versions areadded only when a substantive change to the narrative occurs.

© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 3 of 11

In the corner of a dark wine cellar, a boy smiles as he proudly raises a

Comparative Figures

wooden trap to show the viewer the mouse he has just captured. His
candle’s flame illuminates his excited face and the objects around him
while casting shadows onto the floor and walls. The differences in thedelicate rendering of brightly lit elements—the boy’s face, hair, whitecollar, and the foreground still life motifs—and the freely brushed shadowssimulate the effects of flickering candlelight.
The high quality of this small panel, as well as its charming details anddistinctive chiaroscuro effects, explains why it has been traditionallyattributed to Gerrit Dou (1613–75), Dominicus van Tol’s uncle and teacher.
Indeed, the painting has been attributed to Dou, who was known for his
virtuoso technique in the rendering of candlelit scenes throughout its

Fig 1. Dominicus van Tol,
Children with a Mousetrap, oil on
panel, 31 x 25 cm, Rijksmuseum,
Amsterdam, inv. SK-A-417

recorded history, dating back to 1739, when it appeared in an Amsterdam
auction.[1] Only in 1990, when Ronni Baer rejected the attribution to Dou,was the painting correctly associated with Dominicus van Tol.[2] In
particular, this work closely resembles two other pictures by Van Tol: one
with a similar subject, Children with a Mousetrap in the Rijksmuseum (fig1) and Children at a Window Blowing Bubbles (fig 2), on the art
market.[3] Not only are the facial features and clothing of the boys in thesethree pictures similar, but also the manner in which Van Tol modeled theirforms.
An anonymous biographer from the second half of the eighteenth century
noted that Van Tol owed much to Dou’s artistry: “In our view, he camemost close to his uncle’s manner and adhered to it.” [4] Van Tol often
adapted Dou’s motifs and subjects in his own works—sometimes, as inFig 2. Dominicus van Tol,
Children at a Window Blowing
Bubbles, oil on panel, 27 x 21.6cm, © The Leiden Collection,
New York, DT-101

this instance, coming very close to the style of his master. Here, forexample, he placed his scene within an illusionistically painted stone
window, a pictorial device Dou frequently used.[5] Although Van Tol’s
painterly technique is generally somewhat broader than that of Dou, in thispainting he adopted a refined style to emulate his master. Van Tol’s
subject also relates to a number of Dou’s works, includingWine Cellar (fig3) of ca. 1660. Dou’s painting, depicting lovers surreptitiously meeting in adimly-lit cellar illuminated by a lantern and candle, includes still-life motifs
similar to those in Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight , including amousetrap, a wooden barrel, a head of cabbage and a milk jug.[6] Also
important for Van Tol’s pictorial concept are two paintings by Dou that
depict a young boy, with a similarly round face and curly blond hair,Fig 3. Gerrit Dou, Wine
Cellar—An Allegory of Winter, ca.
1660, oil on panel, 30.5 x 25.4
cm, Hohenbuchau Collection, on© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 4 of 11

holding a mousetrap: Mousetrap, ca. 1650,[7] and another work known
today only from a mezzotint by Nicolaas Verkolje (1673–1746).[8] Vanpermanent loan to Leichtenstein,
The Princely Collections, Vienna

Tol’s picture is not dated, yet dendrochronological analysis of the panel
and the above mentioned similarity with Dou’s Wine Cellar point to aplausible date around 1664–65.[9]Depictions of a boy with a mousetrap enjoyed great popularity among
Dutch painters of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries,
including Quiringh Gerritsz. van Brekelenkam (1622/29–69/79), Eglon van
der Neer (1635/36–1703), Adriaen van der Werff (1659–1722), and Louisde Moni (1698–1771).[10] At first glance the subject appears to be a
portrayal of everyday life, but the motif of the mousetrap could also convey

Fig 4. Daniel Heinsius, Emblem
from Emblemata Amatoria, 1621,
engraving, published Leiden, 44

an amorous message. For instance, in Dou’s Wine Cellar, the flirtatious
interaction of the young couple in a dark cellar combined with the presenceof wine may indicate that the mousetrap alludes to love’s sweet slavery or
the entrapment of love, a connotation found in contemporary emblem
books and proverbs.[11] One of Jacob Cat’s emblems in Sinne- enminnebeelden (1627) illustrates a mouse caught in a trap and warns thatthose who are greedy in love fall prey to the object of their desire. Daniel
Heinsius, in an emblem in his Emblemata Amatoria (Leiden, ca. 1621),
also compares a man who cannot live without love to a mouse, with noviable choice between a trap and a cat (fig 4).[12]Although love’s seduction is not explicitly depicted in Van Tol’s painting,the intimate atmosphere of the dark cellar and the presence of the wine
barrel and the fowl, both of which had strong sexual associations, suggestthat the mousetrap alludes to love’s captivity.[13] Even the smiling boy
displaying the mousetrap may serve to communicate the dangers of love
to innocent youths.
Van Tol’s stylistic and iconographic dependence on Dou’s work indicatesthat he was intimately familiar with the master’s paintings when he createdthis scene. Since Van Tol became a member of the Leiden Guild of SaintLuke in 1664 at the relatively advanced age of 29, it is presumed that hehad previously worked as an assistant in the studio of his uncle and would
have remained close to him before he left Leiden for Utrecht in
1669.[14] This close connection to Dou might explain why the picture has
certain qualities strongly reminiscent of the master’s work, as well as its
subsequent long-standing attribution to him.[15]© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 5 of 11

Although we have no certain knowledge about Dou’s studio practice andhis collaboration with his pupils, a group of paintings by different hands
reflecting the master’s style suggest that he had a number of apprentices
and students in his studio.[16] As is the case with the current picture, their
pictures were sometimes sold later as authentic works by the master, as
noted by the eighteenth-century anonymous biographer mentioned above.
When writing about Jan Adriaensz. van Staveren (1614–69), another pupilof Dou, he notes that “art dealers have long been buying up the most andbest work [by Van Staveren], together with other paintings by different
pupils of Gerard Dou, and selling these as paintings by Dou in foreigncountries.”[17] The attribution of the Leiden Collection picture to Dou wasrepeatedly authorized by art dealers like Willem Lormier, the mostprominent dealer of the eighteenth century. After Lormier’s death in 1763,
the painting was sold at auction and fetched 1,000 guilders—five times
more than what he had originally paid only two decades earlier.[18]-Junko Aono

© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 6 of 11

Endnotes
1. See Willem Martin, “Het leven en de werken van Gerrit Dou” (Ph.D. diss., Universiteit
Leiden, 1901), 241–42, no. 352, as by Dou; Cornelis Hofstede de Groot,Beschreibendes
und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten hollandischen Maler des
XVII. Jahrhunderts (Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28), 1:14, no. 223, as by Dou; Werner
Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler in vier Bänden , 6 vols. (Landau, 1983),
6:3525, 3534, n. 75, as by Dou.
2. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University,1990), no. C81. Because of the lack of a chronological overview of Van Tol’s work—only a
few extant works are dated—it remains difficult to assess the newly attributed picture within
his oeuvre. An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam) is dated 1673:
Pieter J. J. van Thiel, ed., All the Paintings of Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam: A Completely
Illustrated Catalogue (Amsterdam and Maarssen, 1976), no. SK-C-21. Cf. Eric Jan Sluijter,ed., Leidse fijnschilders: Van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh.
cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 235n1.
3. Pieter J. J. van Thiel, ed., All the Paintings of Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam: A Completely
Illustrated Catalogue (Amsterdam and Maarssen, 1976), no. SK-A-417; Eric Jan Sluijter,ed., Leidse fijnschilders: Van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh.
cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 235–36.
4. Anonymous, Lijst van schilders, die binnen de Stad Leijden gebooren zijn, off aldaar
gewoond en de kunst geoeffend hebben (Leiden, ca. 1776–85) (Regionaal Archief Leiden,
Library, LB254-41a, folio deel), biography of Van Tol: “Naar onze gedachten is hij ’tallernaast bij zijn ooms manier gekomen en heeft zich daarbij gehouden.”
5. For other paintings with Van Tol’s typical window composition, see, for example,Woman
with a Fowl in a Window (Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Kassel) and An Old Woman
Winding Yarn (Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden). Bernhard Schnackenburg,
Gemäldegelerie Alte Meister Gesamtkatalog (Mainz, 1985), 297, no. GK 259; Annegret
Laabs, ed., De Leidse Fijnschilders uit Dresden (Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De
Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 2001), 119–21
6. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University,1990), no. 83; Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt ,ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.; Dulwich
Picture Gallery, London; Mauritshuis, The Hague) (New Haven, 2000), no. 23.
7. Quentin Buvelot, Michel Hilaire, and Olivier Zeder, Tableaux Flamands et Hollandais duMusée Fabre de Montpellier (Paris and Zwolle, 1998), 47–51, no. 13; Ronni Baer, “The
Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), no. 55.
© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 7 of 11

8. Junko Aono, “Reproducing the Golden Age: Copies after Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre
Painting in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century,” Oud Holland 121 (2008): 19–20, figs.
17, 18; idem, “De Gouden Eeuw in druk: Reproductieprenten van Nicolaas Verkolje,” inNicolaas Verkolje 1673–1746: De fluwelen hand , ed. Paul Knolle and Everhard Korthals
Altes (Exh. cat. Enschede, Rijksmuseum Twenthe) (Zwolle, 2011), 46. The location of Dou’s
original is unknown: Annegret Laabs, ed., De Leidse Fijnschilders uit Dresden (Exh. cat.
Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 2001), 127.
9. According to dendrochronogical analysis done by Peter Klein, the creation of the painting ispossible as of 1654, but more plausible as of 1664.
10. The picture by Van Brekelenkam in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (inv. no. SK-A-62), thatby Van der Neer in the Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, Cologne (inv. no. Dep-566), that by Van
der Werff in the National Gallery, London (inv. no. 3049), and that by De Moni in an unknown
location(photograph

at

the

RKD

(Rijksbureau

voor

Kunsthistorische

Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History), artwork no. 224516).
11. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University,1990), no. 83; idem, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt , ed.
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.; Dulwich Picture
Gallery, London; Mauritshuis, The Hague) (New Haven, 2000), 110.
12. Jacob Cats, Sinne- en minnebeelden (1627; reprint, The Hague, 1996), 1:102, no. 12;
Daniel Heinsius, Emblemata amatoria (Leiden, ca. 1621), 44. Heinsius’s engraving shows amousetrap in a cellar accompanied by a cupid in the background. For an illustration of thisemblem, and for further iconographic interpretations of the mousetrap, see Eddy de Jongh,Tot Lering en Vermaak: Betekenissen van Hollandse genrevoorstellingen in dezeventiende eeuw (exh. cat., Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (Amsterdam, 1976), 284–87.
13. In seventeenth-century genre paintings, the innocence of children was sometimes used toconvey moralistic messages for adult viewers, or even to act as a foil to the foolish behaviorof adults. Like in other pictures with the same theme, made by Eglon van der Neer or
Adriaen van der Werff, the young boy holding a mousetrap was not the object of sexualattention, but plays a role as a messenger. Some have interpreted his role less innocently bycomparing him to a putto: Eric Jan Sluijter, ed., Leidse fijnschilders: Van Gerrit Dou tot
Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal)(Zwolle, 1988), 228. For sexual connotations of birds depicted in genre paintings, see Eddy
de Jongh, “Erotica in volgeperspectief: De dubbelzinnigheid van een reeks 17de eeuwse
genrevoorstellingen,” Simiolus 3 (1968–1969): 23–27, 35–41; Eric Jan Sluijter, Seductressof Sight: Studies in Dutch Art of the Golden Age (Zwolle, 2000), 278–81.
14. For biographic information on Van Tol’s life, see Piet Bakker’s biography in the current
catalogue.
15. It might also explain why the picture was not signed, which is not typical of Van Tol.
© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 8 of 11

16. The paintings classified by Baer under “works of questionable attribution” belong to thisgroup, like The Kitchen Maid (Musée du Louvre, Paris, inv. no. 1217) and The Woman at
the Clavichord (sale, Christie’s, New York, 25 January 2012, lot no. 49). Ronni Baer, “The
Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), nos. B5, B6.
17. Lijst van schilders, die binnen de Stad Leijden gebooren zijn, off aldaar gewoond en de
kunst geoeffend hebben (Leiden, ca. 1776–85) (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Library,
LB254-41a, folio deel), biography of Van Staveren: “De konsthandelaars hebben demeesten en besten, benevens meer anderen van verscheijde leerlingen van Gerard Douw, al
overlang opgekogt, en buijtenslands voor schilderijen van Douw verkogt.”
18. The picture initially cost Lormier 200 guilders in 1744. Whether Lormier ever noticed andintentionally overlooked the hand of another artist in this panel remains unproven: sale, The
Hague, 25 February 1744, no. 1 [200 florins to W. Lormier from Block], as by Dou; sale,
Willem Lormier, The Hague, 4 July 1763, no. 66 [1,000 florins to Voet], as by Dou.

Provenance(Sale, Amsterdam, 21 October 1739, no. 26 [for 300 florins], as by Dou).
Gerard Block (?) (his sale, The Hague, 25 February 1744, no. 1 [200 florins to W. Lormier; toFrank for 525 florins, 4 June 1756], as by Dou).
Jan Willem Frank, The Hague [to Lormier, 9 March 1758 (his sale, The Hague, 4 July 1763,
no. 66), 1,000 florins to Voet], as by Dou.
(Sale, Amsterdam, 17 April 1783, no. 70, as by Dou).
H. A. van den Heuvel (his sale, Utrecht, 27 June 1825, no. 16 [unsold at 1,500 florins], as byDou); (his sale, Utrecht, 27 April 1827, no. 8 [unsold at 425 florins], as by Dou).
(Sale, C. Kruseman and J. van der Dussen van Zouteveen, Amsterdam, 16 February 1858,
no. 21, as by Dou; or possibly no. 320 [41 florins to Glaser], as by Dou)
Werner Dahl, Düsseldorf, by 1886 (his sale, Amsterdam, 17 October 1905, no. 39 [6,700
florins to Van Gelder], as by Dou).
Possibly Collection Lubelling, by 1929.
Hendrik Cornelis van den Honert (1854–1916), Baarn, by 1946; by descent to Magdalena
Christiana van den Honert (1899–1979), Baarn/Hilversum (sale, Sotheby’s Mak van Waay,
Amsterdam, 22 April 1980, no. 28 [to David Koetser Gallery, Zurich, 1980], as by Dou).
Private collection, Germany (sale, Koller, Zurich, 10 September 1998, no. 41 [unsold], as byDou); [Salomon Lilian B. V., Amsterdam, 2005].
From whom acquired by the present owner.
© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 9 of 11

Exhibition History
Düsseldorf, Kunsthalle, “Bilder von älteren Meistern,” 5 September–7 October 1886, no. 80,
as by Dou [lent by Werner Dahl].
The Hague, Mauritshuis, on loan with the permanent collection, 1932–after 1973, as by Dou[lent by Hendrik Cornelis van den Honert].
Leiden, Museum de Lakenhal, “Gerrit Dou: The Leiden Collection from New York,” 9March–31 August 2014 [lent by the present owner].
Williamstown, The Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, “An Inner World: SeventeenthCentury Dutch Genre Painting,” 5 March–17 September 2017 [lent by the present owner].

References
Catalogus van schilderyen van den heer agent Willem Lormier in ’s Gravenhage . 1752, no.
69, as by Dou.
Hoet, Gerard. Catalogus of Naamlyst van Schilderyen . 2 vols. The Hague, 1752, 2:421, as
by Dou.
Descamps, J. B. La vie des peintres flamands, allemands et hollandaise . 4 vols. Paris,
1753–64, 224, as by Dou.
Smith, John. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish andFrench Painters. 9 vols. London, 1829–42, 1:7, no. 15, as by Dou.
Leven, Theodor. Verzeichniss der in der Kunsthalle zu Düsseldorf ausgestellten Bilder vonälteren Meisteren. Exh. cat. Düsseldorf, Kunsthalle. Düsseldorf, 1886, 22, no. 80, as by Dou.
Leven,

Theodor.

“Die

Ausstellungvon

Bildernälterer

Meisterzu

Düsseldorf.”

Kunstchronik 22, no. 29 (28 April 1887): 490–91, as by Dou.
Von Bode, Wilhelm. “Die Ausstellungen alter Gemälde aus Privatbesitz in Düsseldorf undBrüssel im Herbst 1886.” Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft 10 (1887): 33, as by Dou.
Martin, Willem. Het leven en de werken van Gerrit Dou . Ph.D. diss. Universiteit Leiden.
Leiden, 1901, 241–42, no. 352, as by Dou.
Martin, Willem. Gerard Dou. London, 1902, 128, no. 125, as by Dou.
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 . 8 vols.
London, 1907–27, 1:421, no. 223. Translated from Beschreibendes und kritisches© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 10 of 11

Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten holländischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts .
10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28, 1:14, no. 223, as by Dou.
Martin, Willem. Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre: Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et lesmarchaunds au dix septième siècle. Paris, 1911, 208–9, no. 280, as by Dou.
Martin, Willem. Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde in 247 Abbildungen . Klassiker der
Kunst 24. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1913, 151, as by Dou.
Martin, Willem. “Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen (Mauritshuis).” In Verslagen omtrent ’s
Rijks Verzamelingen van Geschiedenis en Kunst 1932. LV . The Hague, 1933, 29, as by
Dou.
Sumowski, Werner. Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler. 6 vols. Landau, 1995, 6:3525, 3534,
no. 75, as by Dou.
Baer, Ronni. The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675) . 3 vols. Ph.D. diss. New York
University, 1990, no. C81, as rejected attribution of Dou.
Korthals Altes, Everhard. “The Eighteenth-Century Gentleman Dealer Willem Lormier andthe International Dispersal of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Paintings.” Simiolus 28 (2000–1):
267, fig. 17; 309, no. 47, as by Dou.
Korthals Altes, Everhard. De verovering van de internationale kunstmarkt door dezeventiende-eeuwse schilderkunst: Enkele studies over de verspreiding van Hollandse
schilderijen in de eerste helft van de achttiende eeuw. Leiden, 2003, 76–77, fig. 28; 282, no.
47, as by Dou.

Technical Summary
The support, a single plank of vertically grained, rectangular, non-Baltic oak,[1] has bevels on
three sides.[2] The panel is unthinned and uncradled and has no machine tool marks. There is
one paper label and four label fragments, but no wax collection seals, import stamps or panel
maker’s marks.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied followed by paint that has been thinly
and smoothly applied with no use of impasto. Areas of low brushmarking outline the architecturalarch, the figure’s drapery folds, and the jug, bowl, and cabbage along the lower right corner.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images at 780–1000 nanometers, and nocompositional changes are noted aside from the tip of the ring finger of the figure’s proper left
hand, which appears to have been extended during the paint stage.
The painting is unsigned and undated.
The painting was cleaned and restored in 2007 and remains in a good state of preservation.

Technical Summary Endnotes© 2017 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 11 of 11

1. The characterization of the wood is based on Peter Klein’s two dendrochronology reports.
In 2001, Klein speculated the plank was felled after 1645 and creation was possible after
1654. In 2007, Klein speculated the plank was felled after 1652 and creation was possible
after 1664. Further investigation is required.
2. All but the right edge as viewed from the reverse.

© 2017 The Leiden Collection