Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt(Leiden 1640 – 1691 Leiden)

How to cite
Bakker, Piet. “Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 2nd ed. Edited
by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artists/pieter-cornelisz-vanslingelandt/ (archived June 2020).
A PDF of every version of this biography 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.

Pieter van Slingelandt was baptized in the Hooglandse Kerk in Leiden on 4 November 1640. He was theeldest son of the mason Cornelis Pietersz van Slingelandt and Trijntje van Polanen, a cobbler’s daughter.[1]The painter came from a milieu of craftsmen: one of his uncles was also a mason, and another one a cloth
shearer.[2] Pieter’s father was not without means.[3] Pieter was the only one of his nine siblings who nevermarried, and he probably lived at home with his parents until 1678.
Thanks to the Leiden chronicler Simon van Leeuwen (1626–82) we know the identity of Van Slingelandt’steacher. Writing about “den vermaarden Gerrit Douw” (“the renowned Gerrit Dou”) in his city description of1672, he noted that the master “does not hide [his art] from any of his pupils who have talent, as can be seenfrom the stellar rise and flourishing progress of Frans van Mieris (1635–81) and Pieter van Slingelandt, whobecause of their excellence are expected to equal and possibly surpass their master.”[4] According to Arnold
Houbraken (1660–1719), Van Slingelandt did eclipse his teacher, although some reservations can be detected
in his final conclusion. He had seen paintings “that in terms of elaboration and refinement transcend those by
his master; yet there are also some which, having received the same treatment, are somewhat stiff. Still, hewas a great artistic light.”[5] The painter, by whom signed portraits from 1653 and 1656 are known,[6] entered
the Leiden Guild of Saint Luke in 1661 and paid his annual dues with a few interludes until 1681.[7] He was aprominent guild member and served as headman and dean in 1690 and in 1691.
Van Slingelandt’s portraits and genre paintings emulate Gerrit Dou’s (1613–75) style, and, like his master,his pictures commanded high prices. In 1663, when he had only just begun to work independently, the French
diplomat Balthasar de Monconys (1611–65) complained in his travel journal that Van Slingelandt had charged
him 400 guilders for a small painting.[8] He was not the only one who balked at paying Van Slingelandt’s steep© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt
Page 2 of 6prices. Between 1678 and 1680 the painter waged a notorious court case against the heirs of François
Meerman (1630–72), who was in his lifetime the secretary of Leiden. They refused to pay Van Slingelandt
1,500 guilders for a modest-sized family portrait that had been agreed upon with the secretary more than tenyears earlier.[9] According to Houbraken, Van Slingelandt worked on this 1668 portrait for three years, which isconfirmed by the existing testimony.[10] Contributing to the high price will undoubtedly have been the manychanges Meerman had Van Slingelandt make to the painting. Moreover, his laborious work method will haveplayed a role as well: Houbraken “had been told in all truth” that while working on this portrait, Van
Slingelandt had spent “a month or six weeks painting a jabot with lace.”[11] Incidentally, the asking price seems
to have been disputed only by the patrons. Van Slingelandt’s brother-in-law, a bargeman operating regularly
to and from Utrecht, testified that on a boat trip to Bodegraven several years before his death, Dou had
confided to him that Van Slingelandt “had been greatly wronged by Mr. Meerman” and “the virtuoso mannerin which he had portrayed the eldest of the two children alone was worth one thousand guilders and that it wasexceptionally skillfully painted.”[12] The long, drawn-out conflict was finally settled in 1680, when the Court ofHolland largely ruled against Meerman’s heirs, ordering them to pay the painter 1,200 guilders.
From the testimony, moreover, it emerges that Van Slingelandt’s workshop was thriving around 1670. TheMennonite cloth merchant Cornelis van Houck recalled the case of Meerman’s portrait well because it had
greatly delayed the completion of his own likeness and that of his wife and his niece/cousin. The merchantalso cancelled a commission on behalf of another patron who felt that the painter was too caught up in theMeerman portrait affair. Van Houck ultimately received his portraits, which were listed in his estate in 1684.[13]He must have had a special bond with the painter, for he ordered other works and, moreover, Van Houck andthe painter Johannes Hannot (1633–84)—the same person who in 1665 rented a room to Johan de Bye todisplay his Dou collection[14]—stood surety for Van Slingelandt during his lawsuit against Meerman’s heirs.[15]Several dozen portraits by Van Slingelandt are known, only a few subjects of which can be identified. Amongthem are various members of the Van Musschenbroek family, including the brothers Samuel (1639–82) andJohan (1660–1707), who were successful scientific instrument makers.[16] Johan Hulshout, secretary of theRhineland Hoogheemraadschap, and his wife Anna Splinter also found their way to the artist’s workshop.[17]Van Slingelandt, therefore, was not lacking in patrons. However, his extant oeuvre is relatively small. This canbe explained by his slow work method, which was also detrimental to his income; according to Houbraken,“his time-consuming manner of working earned [him] more fame than money.”[18] Pieter Cornelisz vanSlingelandt died on 7 November 1691 and was buried in the Hooglandse Kerk between 10 and 16
November.[19]- Piet Bakker, 2017

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt
Page 3 of 6Endnotes

1. According to Arnold Houbraken, the painter was born on the Oude Vest in Leiden on 20October 1640. Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders
en schilderessen (Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The Hague, 1753; reprint, Amsterdam,1980), 3: 126. His year of birth was thought to be incorrect on the basis of the 1653 portraitsof Jan Hubrecht and his wife Anna Ghijs (both Private Collection) and a self-portrait from1656 (Musée du Louvre, Paris); see Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, A Catalogue Raisonné ofthe Works of the Most Eminent Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century Based on theWork of John Smith, ed. and trans. Edward G. Hawke (London, 1911), 5: 482, nos. 132 and133; Karla Langedijk, “Notities betreffende zelfportretten van Pieter van Slingeland,” Bulletin
van het Rijksmuseum 10 (1962): 88. The discovery of a formerly unknown notarial document
makes it possible to reconstruct the entire family of the mason Cornelis Pieters and establishthat the “Pieter” baptized as the son of “Cornelis Pieters” on 4 November 1640 was, indeed,
the painter. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary M. van Schade, inv. 1222,deed 94, 27 April 1681 (see also note 3).
2. Three of his seven sisters married bargemen and two married tailors. His brother Jacob
became a grocer and his first wife Sara Leopoldus was a daughter of Arent Leopoldus, thefounder of a family of successful house painters.
3. As the heirs of their parents, the children were assessed over a capital of 8,000 guilders in
the Two-Hundredth Penny Tax in 1674. The core of this estate constituted nine houses, threeof which formed a single unit on the Oude Singel. This unit was the parents’ residence, andpresumably Pieter, who remained a bachelor, lived there until at least 1678, as this was hisaddress when he witnessed the marriage of his younger brother Bartholomeus. In 1681, thehouses were divided among the ten children, and Pieter, his then single brother Jacob, andtheir two underage sisters, were allocated six houses on the Havenstraat near the Zijlpoort,
just a stone’s throw from his parents’ house. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives,Notary M. van Schade, inv. 1222, deed 94, 27 April 1681.
4. “[Zijn kunst] voor geen van syne opkwekelingen, die van eenige geest sijn, verborgen houd,als te sien is in de uytstekende opkomst ende bloeyende voortgank van Frans van Mieris,ende Pieter van Slingeland, in welkers uytmuntendheid te verwagten is dat sy haar Meester
gelijk werden, ende waar het mogelijk te boven sullen gaan.” Simon van Leeuwen, Korte
besgryving van het Lugdunum Batavorum nu Leyden (Leiden, 1672), 191–92.
5. “Die in uitvoerigheit en gepolystheit boven die van zyn Meester uitstaken; maar dit is er vandat dezelve door zulk doen wel wat styver zyn. Doch is hy een groot licht in de Konstgeweest.” Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en
schilderessen (Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The Hague, 1753; reprint, Amsterdam, 1980),© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt
Page 4 of 6

3: 126–27.
6. Portrait of of Jan Hubrecht and Portrait of Anna Ghijs, 1653 (both Private Collection) and
Self-Portrait, 1656 (Musée du Louvre, Paris); see Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, A Catalogue
Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century
Based on the Work of John Smith, ed. and trans. Edward G. Hawke (London, 1911), 5: 482,
nos. 132 and 133; Karla Langedijk, “Notities betreffende zelfportretten van Pieter vanSlingeland,” Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 10 (1962): 88.
7. That Van Slingelandt paid his dues intermittently between 1669 and 1672 and stopped
completely as of 1680 does not imply that he lived outside of Leiden from time to time. In
these years, membership fees were often collected on an irregular basis. For the quality ofthe administration of the Guild of Saint Luke, see Piet Bakker, “Crisis? Welke crisis?
Kanttekeningen bij de economische neergang van de schilderkunst in Leiden na 1660,” De
Zeventiende Eeuw 27 (2011): 232–70.
8. Eric J. Sluijter, Marlies Enklaar, and Paul Nieuwenhuizen, eds., Leidse Fijnschilders: Van
Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden, Museum deLakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 205.
9. François Meerman and His Family, 1668 (Musée du Louvre, Paris). For the identification ofthis portrait and the lawsuit between the family and the painter, see Rudolf E.O. Ekkart, “Hetportret van de familie Meerman door Pieter van Slingelandt,” in De Arte et Libris. Festschrift
Erasmus, 1934–1984, ed. Abraham Horodisch, 69–75 (Amsterdam, 1984).
10. Abraham Bredius, “Een schildersproces in de XVIIe eeuw,” Oud Holland 57 (1940): 168–71.
11. “Was voor waarheid verhaalt” and “een maand of ses weken heeft zitten schilderen over een
bef met kant.” Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en
schilderessen (Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The Hague, 1753; reprint, Amsterdam, 1980),
3: 127.
12. “Door de Hr. Meerman seer grotelix wierde verongelyckt” and “dat de cunst die gedaen wasaen het conterfeytsen van de outste van de twee kinderen met duysent gulden alleen
waerdich was en dat het ongemeen cunstisch was geschildert.” Abraham Bredius, “Eenschildersproces in de XVIIe eeuw,” Oud Holland 57 (1940): 169. The witness, Gelein Jorisz
van der Kaey, had married Agnieta Cornelisdr van Slingelandt, the painter’s sister, in 1671.
13. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary L. van Overmeer, inv. 978, deed 125, 12October 1684, with the following entry: “2 conterfeytsels van de overledene en zijn eerste
vrouw gedaen door Slingerlant” (two likenesses of the deceased and his first wife done bySlingerlant).
14. See the biography of Gerrit Dou in this catalogue.
15. Regionaal Archief Leiden, Notarial Archives, Notary L. van Overmeer, inv. 978, deed 125, 12
October 1684, “2 ebbenhoute kasjens van Slingerlant” (two ebony cases by Slingerlant);© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt
Page 5 of 6

Abraham Bredius, “Een schildersproces in de XVIIe eeuw,” Oud Holland 57 (1940): 171. This
will have been a reference to two paintings in cases with painted doors similar to works by his
master Gerrit Dou.
16. Among the known portraits is the Portrait of Johan van Musschenbroek and His Wife Mariavan der Straaten, 1685/88 (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), presumably painted in 1685, theyear of their marriage. Two separate pendant portraits of the couple have been preserved;
they are replicas of the portrait in Boston (both in a private collection). Van Slingelandt also
portrayed Johan’s brother Samuel in 1674 (private collection). Additionally, the painter drew
two miniature pendant portraits of this Samuel and his sister Sara (1647–1710) (whereaboutsunknown). Listed in the 1872 estate inventory of Jan Tiberius Bodel Nijenhuis are twoportraits “door Slingeland” (“by Slingeland”) representing Samuel van Musschenbroek and“zijne echtgenoote” (“his wife”). The latter identification is incorrect, however, for Samuelnever married. See Theodoor Hermann Lunsingh Scheurleer, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, andA.J. van Dissel, eds., Het Rapenburg. Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht (Leiden, 1992), 6:
704. On the Van Musschenbroek family, see C.A. Crommelin, “Leidsche leden van het
Geslacht Van Musschenbroek,” Leids Jaarboekje 31 (1939): 134–49.
17. Portrait of Johan Hulshout (1623–1687), ca. 1670 (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York);
and Portrait of Anna Splinter (1630–1694), ca. 1670 (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin).
18. “Won [hy] door zyne tydslytende wyze van schilderen meer roem als gelt aan.” Arnold
Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen(Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The Hague, 1753; reprint, Amsterdam, 1980), 3: 127.
19. For the date of death, Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche
konstschilders en schilderessen (Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The Hague, 1753; reprint,Amsterdam, 1980), 3: 127: “Pieter Cornelis van Slingelandt, [wonend] op de Mare,” (“PieterCornelis van Slingelandt, [residing] at the Mare”) was buried in the Hooglandse Kerk between
10 and 16 November. See also Karla Langedijk, “Notities betreffende zelfportretten van
Pieter van Slingeland,” Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 10 (1962): 88. Eric Jan Sluijter, Marlies
Enklaar, and Paul Nieuwenhuizen, Leidse Fijnschilders: Van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris
de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden, Museum de Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 205, gives thecorrect reference, but the wrong church (Pieterskerk). Judging from the address, Slingelandt
had meanwhile moved in with his brother Jacob. On 17 November, a week after the burial of
his brother, Jacob and Sara Leopoldus, the daughter of a house painter, posted their banns.

Literature
Van Leeuwen, Simon. Korte Besgryving Van het Lugdunum Batavorum nu Leyden. Leiden,© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Pieter Cornelisz van Slingelandt
Page 6 of 61672, 191–92.
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 translatedby Edward G. Hawke. 8 vols. London, 1907–28.
Bredius, Abraham. “Een schildersproces in de XVIIe eeuw.” Oud Holland 57 (1940): 168–71.
Langedijk, Karla. “Notities betreffende zelfportretten van Pieter van Slingeland.” Bulletin van
het Rijksmuseum 10 (1962): 85–88.
Houbraken,Arnold.

De

grooteschouburgh

derNederlantsche

konstschildersen

schilderessen. 3 vols. Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition published in The Hague, 1753;
reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980.
Ekkart, Rudolf E.O. “Het portret van de familie Meerman door Pieter van Slingelandt.” In De
Arte et Libris. Festschrift Erasmus, 1934–1984. Edited by Abraham Horodisch, 69–75.
Amsterdam, 1984.
Sluijter, Eric Jan, Marlies Enklaar, and Paul Nieuwenhuizen. Leidse Fijnschilders: Van Gerrit
Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760. Exh. cat. Leiden, Museum de Lakenhal.
Zwolle, 1988.
Lunsingh Scheurleer, Theodoor Hermann, Cornelia Willemijn Fock, and A.J. van Dissel, eds.
Het Rapenburg: Geschiedenis van een Leidse gracht. 6 vols. Leiden, 1986–92.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection