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,

2nd

ed.

EditedbyArthurK.

Wheelock

Jr.

New

York,

2017–20.

https://theleidencollection.com/essays/frans-van-mieris-the-elder-and-his-four-leiden-patrons/ (archived May2020).
A PDF of every version of this essay is available in this Online Catalogue's Archive, and the Archive ismanaged by a permanent URL. New versions are added only when a substantive change to the narrative
occurs.

© 2020 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 the crown 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 hecommanded, only the very wealthiest of them. This essay examines thesebuyers, specifically the four whom Houbraken deemed to be the artist’s mostimportant 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 of 32,
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 ofSaint Luke, however, he increasingly distanced himself from his teacher.
Though he still derived subjects from Dou, he now drew inspiration from theHaarlem genre painter Adriaen van Ostade (1610–85), whose work foundparticular favor in Leiden.[5] Other important influences were his fellow
townsmen Quiringh van Brekelenkam (after 1622–ca. 1669) (fig 3), withwhom he had worked as a pupil 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

Fig 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.

Meal on Steen’s somewhat earlier Girl Eating Oysters now in The Hague,
while Steen derived his variations of 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 figures in elegant interiors had a substantial impact
on Van Mieris.[6] Van Mieris must have 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 of the 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.
© 2020 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

QB-100.

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]Surprisingly, however, much as with Dou, extant estate inventories in Leiden

Fig 4. Gabriel Metsu, Old Woman
at Her Meal in an Interior, ca.
1654–57, oil on canvas, 82.6 x
68.7 cm, The Leiden Collection,
New York, inv. no. GM-102.

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 theGolden Age in this catalogue). Of the 258 Leiden estate inventories used forthis research, 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 ofDou, was so 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.
Attestations of this fact are found primarily in literary sources, and theygenerally touch on the exorbitant amounts that foreign princes were willing to

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.

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

Fig 6. Frans van Mieris the Elder,Child’s Lesson (Hannah© 2020 The Leiden Collection

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

price of 25,000 guilders.[16]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

Entrusting Her Son Samuel into to
the Care of the High Priest Eli?),ca. 1656–57, oil on panel witharched top, 29.2 x 21.7 cm, The
Leiden Collection, New York, inv.
no. FM-102.

more than 6,100 guilders, five were by Van Mieris, three of which were themost highly 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 Gerrit
Dou worth 300 guilders according to the appraisers. Whether these generous
amounts correspond to the prices Gerard actually paid for the works is not

Fig 7. Gerard ter Borch, The
Reading Lesson, ca. 1652, oil on
panel, 27 x 25 cm, Musée du
Louvre, inv. no. M.I. 1006, © RMNGrand Palais / Art Resource, NY,
Photo: Gérard Blot.

certain. 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 theacademic 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. Thissecond sojourn too was short lived, for he moved to Amsterdam in 1641 andopened what proved to be a highly successful and profitable physician’s

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.

practice. There, in 1649, he married Anna de Ligne (1626–57), the youngest
daughter of the wealthy grain merchant Abraham de Ligne and Catharina deWillem.[21]After the death of his wife in 1657, Sylvius accepted a position as professorof medicine in Leiden for an honorarium of 1,800 guilders per year, twice
what his colleagues received. By then his reputation extended far beyond theDutch Republic. For instance, a German student commended “Sir Dr. Sylvio© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 5 of 16[…] [for] his erudition, which brought him fame unequaled in Holland andGermany. All of the great men in Europe sought his council and gave him
lavish gifts.”[22] Foreign scholars who spent some time in Leiden also spokeof him with respect. The Danish scholar Ole Borch (1626–90), who was inLeiden between 1661 and 1663, took detailed notes of Sylvius’s lectures
and the chemistry experiments he conducted in his laboratory at his houseon 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

Fig 9. Frans van Mieris the Elder,
Sleeping Officer in an Inn, ca.
1666, oil on panel, 42.5 x 33 cm,
Bayerische
Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Alte
Pinakothek, Munich, inv. no. 241.
© bpk, Berlin / Art Resource, NY.

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) 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
Lutheran family, several members of which moved in the social circles
around the Swedish court.[27] Johann’s father, as well as his grandfather,had been the personal physician of the Swedish king, and his brother Adolf

Fig 10. Fig 10. Cornelis van Dalen
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.

was ambassador 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]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 partin many important missions as “secretaris van de Geheime Kamer”
Fig 11. Frans van Mieris the Elder,© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 6 of 16(secretary of the Privy Council) in the service of Elector Frederick William I(1620–88) of Brandenburg. Schlezer seems to have played a key role in
1646 in the wedding negotiations between the Great Elector and Louise

Portrait of Florentius Schuyl(1619–1669), 1666, oil on copperon panel, 21.3 x 16.5 cm,
Mauritshuis, The Hague, inv. no.
107.

Henriette of Nassau (1627–67), daughter of Stadholder Frederik Hendrik(1584–1647) and Amalia van Solms (1602–75). Margareta Lucretia Schlezer
was born in Kleve, which probably indicates that she was born soon after theelectoral wedding, since Frederick William and his bride spent the first yearsof their marriage in that 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 arelationship similar 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 theprivilege of paying a price commensurate with what another [collector] hadalreadyoffered.”[33]

Words

such

as

“dikwerf”(regularly),“verzogt”(requested), and “mogt wezen” (might be) are not indicative of an existing
situation, but rather a desired one.[34] It is also highly questionable whether
Sylvius could afford the kind of financial agreement that existed between Dou

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

and Spiering. There is no doubt that he was wealthy, but whether he was richenough to pay 500 guilders a year for the right of first refusal isunlikely.[35] That Sylvius greatly admired Van Mieris’s work, however, isevident: 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) wasin 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

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.

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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Frans van Mieris the Elder and His Four Leiden Patrons
Page 7 of 16).[41] Although there is no direct indication that Barbette was the original
owner of Van Mieris’s double portrait of Silvius and his wife, given the family
relationship he seems ideally suited for ordering an expensive portrait ofsomeone he knew well, but who was not a relative.
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, andan 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
he receive the astonishingly high sum of 1,000 guilders for the work, but hewas also invited to become Leopold’s court painter in Vienna for a
staggering annual stipend of 2,500 guilders.[43]The painter thanked theFig 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, Florence-courtesy of the Ministero Beni e
Att. Culturali.

Archduke most kindly for this signal honor, but asserted that he wascompelled to decline because his wife was unwilling to leave Leiden. The
truth of the matter, however, was that Van Mieris did not lack in profitablecommissions in Leiden and therefore felt no acute need to leave hishometown.
Van Mieris found favor with yet another princely admirer: Cosimo III de’
Medici (1642–1723). In 1667 and 1669—before succeeding his father asGrand Duke of Tuscany in 1670—Cosimo made two incognito trips to the
Dutch Republic, during which he met many magistrates, scholars andartists.[44] He also visited Sylvius’s home on the Rapenburg, which isprobably where he first became acquainted with Van Mieris’s paintings.[45] It
also seems likely that 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

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.

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
GerritDou,[48]

Pancakes.

from

whom

he

probablybought

Woman

MakingThis notwithstanding, the future Grand Duke seems to havebeen impressed most by Van Mieris, whom he engaged to produce anotherfive paintings in the years after his return to Florence. Van Mieris wasrenowned for his self-portraits, such as the one in The Leiden Collection inwhich he expresses surprise (fig 15). It is, thus, not surprising that one of thepaintings Cosimo ordered was a self-portrait for his gallery of Europeancelebrities.[49]© 2020 The Leiden Collection

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

Cornelis Paets and the Mysterious “Vredenburg”
While staying in Leiden, Cosimo also called on Cornelis Paets and took atour of his splendid picture collection. He was particularly struck by “acabinet picture depicting a young lady in a swoon, along with a doctor, andan old woman weeping” (fig 16).[50] Van Mieris had begun this painting in
1663. In that year French envoy Balthasar de Monconys had called on Van
Mieris and found him at work on it. He was astonished to hear that Van
Mieris wanted 1,200 guilders for the piece once it was completed.[51]According to Houbraken, Paets had agreed to pay Van Mieris 6 guilders forevery hour he worked on it (this is the famous Doctor’s Visit now in Los[52]

Angeles).

This agreement ultimately cost Paets a staggering 1,500

guilders, or 300 guilders more than the already exorbitant initial amount.

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.

Cosimo was eager to acquire the work and offered Paets twice as much forit, 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 beenfound, although such a role cannot be definitively excluded. Van Mieris may
have owed the commission for the portrait of Allard van Couwenhoven,Fig 17. Frans van Mieris the Elder,
Portrait of Agatha Paets, 1665, oil
on panel, 27 x 21.5 cm, Private
Collection, United States.

Agatha’s father, to Cornelis Paets.[55] Paets was Van Mieris’s contemporary
and had known him since his youth. According to Houbraken, Paets was a
fervent amateur painter and had received instruction in drawing from Van
Mieris. Paets’s involvement with 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

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

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
to buy 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; thefour Leiden estate owners with only a single work by the artist were, in any
case, much richer than Van Vredenburch.[58] The only other person from
Leiden who could vie for the designation “Maecenas” was the merchantAlexander de Koninck from Zeeland. In 1681 five undescribed paintings by
Van Mieris hung in 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 successfulcareer in the Rotterdam town council, Van Vredenburch had studied law inLeiden in the early 1660s.[60] Upon his return to Rotterdam in 1665, hemarried Maria van Couwenhoven, a first cousin of Agatha van
Couwenhoven, the wife of Cornelis 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 have been exposed to Van Mieris’s work through his
uncle, namely Agatha’s father, for the fabulously wealthy Allard van
Couwenhoven had his likeness limned by Van Mieris.[62] When the
Rotterdam city secretary and owner of more 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 der Helst (1613–70), Rembrandt van Rijn
(1606–69),

and

Jan

Lievens(1607–74),

amongothers.[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[64]

Agatha’s likeness.

Paets,

doubtlessinthevicinityof

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

© 2020 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
© 2020 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© 2020 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© 2020 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,© 2020 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;© 2020 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© 2020 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.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection