Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, andMelon and a Butterfly on a Stone Plate
Dordrecht School(Made 1643 – 1706 The Hague)ca. 1660–80
oil on panel
40.5 x 35 cm
signed (erroneously) in dark paint alonglower right corner: “G.Schalcke”
GS-100© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on aStone Plate
Page 2 of 8

How to cite
Jansen, Guido. “Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on a Stone Plate” (2017). In TheLeiden Collection Catalogue, 2nd ed. Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/still-life-with-peaches-grapes-and-melon-and-a-butterfly-on-a-stone-plate/ (archived May2020).
A PDF of every version of this entry 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 narrativeoccurs.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on aStone Plate
Page 3 of 8

Prior to the appearance of Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a

Comparative Figures

Butterfly on a Stone Plate in a London sale in 2001, only two still lifes byGodefridus Schalcken were known.[1] Much excitement surrounded this
discovery because the attribution was deemed correct, both because thepainting was signed and because Schalcken featured similar peaches andgrapes in other paintings. Indeed, Schalcken’s best-known still life is A
Bunch of Grapes in Stockholm, a canvas that Peter Hecht has convincingly
related to late seventeenth-century theoretical discussions about the best
way for artists to study chiaroscuro.[2]The still life ensemble includes two bunches of grapes—one red and one
white—that rest on a green stone plinth, at the edge of which are two peaches
and a blue ribbon. Behind the grapes is a large yellow-green melon, on top ofwhich lie a medlar and a branch with dried, yellowish leaves that contrast
with the dark, reddish-brown background.[3] Hovering at the left is a Red
Admiral butterfly (Vanessa atalanta), which is still commonly found in theNetherlands. A dark strip approximately two centimeters wide extends acrossthe lower edge of the panel.
Although the signature at first seems to support an attribution of this painting
to Schalcken, its character actually differs from the artist’s normal manner ofsigning. To begin with, the artist’s name is not rendered with his usual,powerful brushwork on the stone plinth, which would have been the logicalplace for him to sign this work. Rather, the signature is rather hesitantly
drawn at the extreme lower right with a fine brush and black paint on the dark
background, barely discernible to the naked eye. Uncharacteristically, the Gis placed somewhat lower than normal and the E is higher than the otherletters, which look straggly compared to the firmly defined strokes of his
usual hand.[4] It now appears that the signature is apocryphal and was added
at a later date. Stylistic comparisons also call into question this painting’sattribution to Schalcken. Not only is the palette different, but the painting
lacks the painter’s flowing brushwork.[5]An interesting comparison can be made between the two peaches in thispainting and those in Schalcken’s Portrait of a Lady, 1680, and his Venuswith Cupid, Bacchus and Ceres in Prague, which also dates around
1680.[6] As Meijer has rightly observed, Schalcken’s peaches in the latter
two paintings are stylistically similar to those executed by his contemporaryfrom Dordrecht, Abraham van Calraet (1642–1722). In 1678 Schalcken’steacher, Samuel van Hoogstraten (1627–78), published his Inleyding tot de© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on a
Stone Plate
Page 4 of 8hooge schoole der schilderkonst (“Introduction to the Academy of Painting”),in which he praised Van Calraet—though not by name—for distinguishinghimself “by portraying a large dish piled high with beautiful peaches,
extremely juicy and perfectly rendered.” [7] As a young artist, Schalcken
undoubtedly studied Van Hoogstraten’s book and shared his teacher’s
admiration for Van Calraet’s manner of depicting peaches, as is evident in
the way he modeled peaches in the two paintings executed around 1680.[8]Even if Schalcken were inspired by Van Calraet, there is no evidence that hemade fruit and flower still lifes at that time: these only appear in his Englishperiod (1692–96). A Bouquet of Flowers in Oxford can be dated to the1690s, and a similarly late date holds true for A Bunch of Grapes inStockholm.[9] By that period of his career, Schalcken’s style had evolved,
and neither of these still life paintings is reminiscent of those by Van
Calraet.[10] Strikingly, however, Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melonand a Butterfly on a Stone Plate is closely related in composition, pictorial
elements and workmanship to one of Van Calraet’s earliest known still lifes,
in which he depicted a bunch of white grapes and five peaches on a plinthwith two Red Admiral butterflies.[11] Further research is needed to determine
whether the present painting can actually be attributed to Van Calraet, but
without doubt this painting is closer in style to Van Calraet’s still lifes than tothose made by Schalcken.
A date of execution around 1670 is supported by dendrochronologicalexamination. The panel’s last complete growth ring dates from 1646, whichmeans that the West European oak that supplied the wood for this panel was
felled after 1654. The still life is therefore likely to have been completed
between 1660 and 1680.[12]- Guido Jansen, 2017

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on aStone Plate
Page 5 of 8Endnotes

1. Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988), nos. 209 and 210. His nos. 249 and250 were once wrongly attributed to Schalcken. Mention must also be made here of a Vanitas
Still Life in Geneva, Switzerland, which is ascribed to Schalcken on the basis of the lettering
around a clock, which is read as “G[…]lken”; Frédéric Elsig, L’art et ses marches: La peinture
flamande et hollandaise, XVIIe–XVIIIe siècles, au Musée d’art et d’histoire de Genève(Geneva, 2009), 352, no. 230; Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988), no. 354.
That painting has been attributed to Schalcken for more than two centuries, since it wasreproduced in 1815 by Landon as a line engraving in his Galerie de M. Massias, 144–45,
planche 69, Tableau de nature morte, effet de lampe, par Schalken. This painting is not likely
to be identical with the Vanity by Scalken in Mr. Sykes Sale 1733 (1st Day), lot 67; see
Mansfield Kirby Talley, “Small, usuall, and vulgar things”: Still-Life Painting in England
1635–1760,” Walpole Society 49 (1983): 210. In spite of its very old attribution, the painting inGeneva is not the work of Schalcken.
2. Peter Hecht, “Candlelight and Dirty Fingers, or Royal Virtue in Disguise: Some Thoughts on
Weyerman and Godfried Schalken,” Simiolus 11 (1980): 31–35.
3. Fred G. Meijer, The Collection of Dutch and Flemish Still Life Paintings Bequeathed by DaisyLinda Ward (catalogue of the Daisy Linda Ward collection of paintings of the AshmoleanMuseum) (Zwolle, 2003), 273, note 2.
4. Complicating an assessment of the signature, the N is missing due to damage to the paintsurface. With thanks to the restorer of the Dordrechts Museum, Lidwien Speleers, who in
November 2012 allowed me to study the panel unframed and in good lighting conditions,including ultraviolet light.
5. In contrast to the assertions made in Fred G. Meijer, The Collection of Dutch and Flemish Still
Life Paintings Bequeathed by Daisy Linda Ward (catalogue of the Daisy Linda Wardcollection of paintings of the Ashmolean Museum) (Zwolle, 2003), 273 n. 2.
6. See Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris,1988), no. 117, for the Portrait of a Lady,and no. 43 for the large canvas in Prague. For the latter painting, see also Hanna Seifertova,
in Anja K. Sevcik, National Gallery in Prague: Dutch Paintings of the 17th and 18thCenturies (Prague, 2012), no. 395, with an illustration in color.
7. Samuel van Hoogstraten, Inleyding tot de hooge Schoole der Schilderkonst: Anders dezichtbaere werelT (Rotterdam, 1678), 181: “Zeker Schilder, mijn lantsgenoot, had laetst zijn
vlijt dapper betoont: want hy had een groote en wel opgehoopte schootel met schoone
Persikken uittermaeten sappich en net uitgeschildert, en zich in stuk voor stuk dapper
gequeeten. Ik verwonderde my, die ziende, over zijn vlijt en gedult” (A certain painter, my© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on a
Stone Plate
Page 6 of 8

fellow townsman, recently demonstrated his diligence by portraying a large dish piled highwith beautiful peaches, extremely juicy and perfectly rendered, having acquitted himself wellin each and every one. Upon seeing that, I was amazed at his diligence and patience).
8. It is always possible, of course, that Schalcken had seen and possibly admired the peach still
lifes by his fellow townsman on an earlier occasion, without this exerting an immediateinfluence on his work. It is undeniable that Schalcken painted Van Calraet-like peaches only
after Van Hoogstraten had praised them in his book.
9. Fred G. Meijer, The Collection of Dutch and Flemish Still Life Paintings Bequeathed by Daisy
Linda Ward (Zwolle, 2003), 272–73, and Görel Cavalli-Björkman, Dutch and FlemishPaintings, 3 vols. (Stockholm, 2005), 446–47, no. 450.
10. Abraham van Calraet, on the other hand, had examined Schalcken’s work closely. Several of
his genre pieces, painted in the style of Schalcken, were once attributed to him. An example
is Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988), no. 286, which in my view is by VanCalraet. The small oval painting A Laughing Man with a Glass of Wine was also ascribed toSchalcken.

InekeWansinkoftheRKD(Rijksbureauvoor

Kunsthistorische

Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History) has reattributed this panel to Van Calraet;
see the note on the photograph kept at the RKD (Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorische
Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History). In 1966 this small panel was on display at
Norwich Castle Museum as a Schalcken as part of the exhibition Dutch Paintings from East
Anglia; at the time it belonged to the collection of T. R. C. Blofeld at Hoveton, Wroxham,Norfolk; see Miklós Rajnai, Dutch Paintings from East Anglia: Loan Exhibition, 20 July–29
August 1966 (Exh. cat. Norwich Castle Museum) (Norwich, 1966), no. 40 (14.6 x 11.4 cm; notillustrated).
11. This panel, measuring 42 x 37.8 cm, was last seen at a sale in London (Phillips, 5 December
1995, lot 26, with an illustration in color). It is signed in full at the lower left: 167(0) fecit A v
kalraet Beeltsneijder. The type of signature indicates that this is one of Van Calraet’s earliest
still lifes. A reproduction of it can also be found on the RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History)’s website, images, no.
10751.
12. See the report by Ian Tyers, “The Tree-Ring Analysis of 12 Panel Paintings from the Leiden
Gallery, New York” (November 2012), 26.

Provenance
Private collection (sale, Christie’s, London, 11 July 2001, no. 40).
[Rafael Valls Ltd., London, 2002].
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on aStone PlatePage 7 of 8(Sale, Galerie Koller, Zürich, 24 September 2003, no. 3061).
From whom acquired by the present owner in 2003.

Exhibition History
Dordrecht, Dordrecht Museum, temporary exhibition with the permanent collection, November
2010–March 2013 [lent by the present owner].

References
Beherman, Thierry. Godfried Schalcken. Paris, 1988, 330, no. 251.
Rafael Valls Ltd. Recent Acquisitions. London, 2002, no. 30.
Van der Willigen, Adriaan, and Fred G. Meijer. A Dictionary of Dutch and Flemish Still-life
Painters Working in Oils, 1525–1725. Leiden, 2003, 178.
Meijer, Fred G. The Collection of Dutch and Flemish Still-Life Paintings Bequeathed by Daisy
Linda Ward. Zwolle, 2003, 123, 272–73, no. 67, no. 2.

Technical Summary
The support, a single plank of vertically grained, vertically oriented rectangular, wedge-shaped
oak, has bevels along three sides.[1] The panel is unthinned and uncradled and has machine tool
marks.[2] There is one paper label and white chalk along the panel reverse but no wax collection
seals, import stamps or panel maker’s mark.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied followed by a gray underlayer.[3] The
paint has been smoothly applied with no use of impasto. Dark brown paint is visible below the red
paint along the background.[4]The painting has not been examined with infrared. In the X-radiograph, the peaches are radioopaque, and under ultraviolet light, restorations are visible along the background.
The painting is (erroneously) signed in dark paint along the lower right corner but is undated.
The painting has not undergone conservation treatment since its acquisition in 2003 and remains
in a good state of preservation.[5]© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Still Life with Peaches, Grapes, and Melon and a Butterfly on aStone Plate
Page 8 of 8

Technical Summary Endnotes

1. The characterization of wood is based on visual examination only. There are bevels along all
but the left edge as viewed from the reverse.
2. Based on visual examination of the X-radiograph. The machine toolmarks are not noted in theDordrecht examination report.
3. Based on visual examination of the high-resolution image. The ground color and underlayer
are not noted in the Dordrecht examination report.
4. The red layer overlaps the yellow leaves.
5. Entry based on December 2011 examination report by Lidwien Speleers, paintings
conservator, Dordrecht Museum, and information gleaned by reexamining the front and verso
images and the X-radiograph.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection