Demonstration of Wax Figuresca. 1685–95

Follower of Jan Havicksz. Steen, possibly

oil on canvas

Richard Brakenburgh (Haarlem 1650–1703)

68.5 x 55.3 cm
JS-102© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 2 of 10

How To Cite
Kloek, Wouter. "Demonstration of Wax Figures." 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

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 3 of 10

Adults and children gaze in amazement at the contents of a cabinet

Comparative Figurescontaining wax figurines that a young man holds up for them to see. He is
undoubtedly one of the Savoyards—natives of Savoy—who were wellknown as itinerant musicians (often seen with a hurdy-gurdy and amonkey) or, as in this case, showmen who demonstrated their tricks for asmall fee. Although Savoyards generally had a bad reputation, no one inthis crowd seems the least bit wary of his presence. This showman has
attracted a range of onlookers, including an adolescent girl holding a
toddler in her arms and two or three boys at her right, one of whom has
placed his left arm on the shoulder of a smaller lad wearing a hat. A
milkman and his wife are so engrossed in the performance that they do notnotice that a dog is lapping up milk from the milkman’s pail. An inquisitive
young girl, hoping to enjoy the performance, enters the courtyard throughFig 1. Jan Steen, Little Alms
Collector, ca. 1665, oil on panel,
59 x 51 cm, Petit Palais, Paris,Legs Dutuit, 1902, PDUT00930

the gate at the left. A young woman watches the goings-on from the doorof the building as an older man stares at her, transfixed by her beauty. To
the right of the children, an elderly woman observes the scene through apince-nez, unaware that the showman’s young accomplice is reaching into
her purse to steal from her. The boy simultaneously points at her and looks
at the viewer, his mocking expression signifying both her stupidity and hergullibility.
The theme of this painting is “appearances are deceiving and people areinclined to be deceived.” This aphorism, popularized by Sebastian Brandt,
well known as the author of Narrenschip (Ship of Fools) of 1494, is basedon a saying attributed to Petronius (ca. 27–66 A.D.) “Mundus vult decipi,

Fig 2. Willem vanMieris, Peepshow, 1718, oil on
panel, 58 x 49 cm, Rijksmuseum,
Amsterdam, SK-A-4941

ergo decipiatur” (the world wants to be deceived, so let it bedeceived).[1] Brandt was also the compiler of Paradoxa, a collection ofproverbs that appeared in 1542 and was responsible for the wide
dissemination of many proverbs. Jan Steen, who often based his pictorial
themes on such proverbs, used his illusionistic manner of painting toreinforce the idea of human deception and the absurdity of the world.
The façade of the building providing the backdrop to the assembled
company is similar to that in Jan Steen’s painting Little Alms Collector, ca.
1665, a depiction of the children’s parade held at Whitsuntide (fig1).[2] Despite the similarity of the building and the gate in these twopaintings, however, numerous small differences indicate that the scene is
not an accurate rendering of an existing location.[3] One difference, forexample, is the flaking plaster on the building in Little Alms Collector,© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 4 of 10

which is absent in Demonstration of Wax Figures.
Despite the compositional connections to Little Alms Collector, there arereasons to doubt the attribution of Demonstration of Wax Figures to Steen.
First of all, the execution is quite smooth and too uninspired to be the workof this master. One searches in vain for the expressive rendering ofclothing that Steen so depicted with painterly brilliance, often executed wetinto-wet.[4] The meticulous execution of the heads of the secondary
figures—such as the woman standing in the doorway and the girl holding ahoop, approaching from the left—is not typical of the cursory character inwhich the master depicted his supporting actors. Moreover, the facial
features of the cutpurse cannot be reconciled with figure types from
Steen’s own hand.[5]One possibility is that the painting is based on a lost original by the master.
This theory is premised, in part, by the existence of another slightly
different version of the painting, also executed by a follower of
Steen.[6] Both versions may derive from a lost original by the master or,
given the differences between them, from two lost originals.[7] In the Leiden
Collection painting, for example, the girl approaching from the left has inher hands a hoop and a stick; in the other version she holds a little windmill
on a stick.[8] The two figures in the doorway are also different: instead of ayoung woman and an older man leering at her, one sees a boy in a red cap
and a young woman in a white cap who leans towards her companion. The
clothing of the Savoyard’s apprentice is also completely different in these
two works.
With the regard to the dating, it is significant that a milkman occupies acentral position in another of Steen’s compositions, Milkman, which theartist executed in the late 1650s. The composition of this work is alsosimilar, for the scene takes place in a courtyard with an archway opening
to a distant vista.[9] These similarities suggest that Steen’s originalcomposition, on which the Leiden Collection painting is based, probably
also dated from the second half of the 1650s.
Perhaps Richard Brakenburgh, a follower of Jan Steen, who often createdheads such as those of the background figures in this work, was the makerof the present painting. Although there is insufficient evidence to definitely
attribute the work to him, it may be assumed that the painting was© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 5 of 10

executed in the late seventeenth century, at a time when Brakenburgh wasmaking his many free imitations of Steen, including, for example,Feast ofSaint Nicholas and Little Alms Collector, a work for which he unmistakably
drew inspiration from Steen’s painting in the Petit Palais in Paris.[10] An Xradiograph has revealed that the present work is painted over a male
portrait, the style of which is not in keeping with that of Steen’s few known
portraits.[11]The theme of Demonstration of Wax Figures was the focus of a paintingby Willem van Mieris (1662–1747), Peepshow (fig 2), which the Leiden
artist made in 1718 for the prosperous Leiden collector Allard de la Court,
who purchased it for the huge sum of 1,000 guiders.[12] In those days Van
Mieris’s painting was also called ’t Fraaij curieus, a title that imitates thecry (“vrai curieux”) that the Savoyards sang in praise of their marvelouspeepshows. The painting’s Dutch title, Rarekiek, is derived from kijken (tolook) and raar (strange, rare, or curious), the latter not so much in thesense of “strange” (the usual meaning of the Dutch word), but rather in theEnglish sense of “curious” or “exceptional.” As opposed toDemonstrationof Wax Figures, Van Mieris’s emphasis lies on the onlookers’ surprise andthe detailed depiction of the peasant interior, not on the deceit of simple
folk who let themselves be fooled.

-Wouter Kloek© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 6 of 10Endnotes
1. Similar sayings occur in the writings of Saint Augustine and Martin Luther.
2. 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 , 8 vols. (London,1907–27), translated from Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke derhervorragendsten holländischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts , 10 vols. (Esslingen andParis, 1907–28), nos. 304, 307, 311; and K. Braun, Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen(Rotterdam, 1980), no. 246. See, in particular, H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, andArthur K. Wheelock Jr., Jan Steen, Painter and Storyteller , ed. Guido Jansen (Exh. cat.
Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (New Haven andLondon, 1996), no. 26 (text by Arthur Wheelock).
3. The building is also similar to that in an etching by Adriaen van Ostade (1610–84/85),TheKnife Grinder (B. 36), which the artist executed around 1653. A preparatory drawing ispreserved in the British Museum in London; see S. William Pelletier, L. J. Slatkes, and L.
Stone Ferrier, Adriaen van Ostade: Etchings of Peasant Life in Holland’s Golden Age(Athens, Ga., 1994), 184–85, 266, no. 36. The resemblance was observed by DominiqueSuhr.
4. This technique, which is characteristic of Steen’s work, was first described by Marigene
Butler in “An Investigation of the Technique and Materials Used by Jan Steen,”Bulletin of
the Philadelphia Museum of Art 78 (1982–83): 45–46. See also Martin Bijl, “The Artist’s
Working Method,” in H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.,JanSteen, Painter and Storyteller, ed. Guido Jansen (Exh. cat. Washington D.C., National
Gallery of Art; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (New Haven and London, 1996), 89.
5. Doubt was first cast on the attribution to Steen at the RKD (Rijksbureau voor
Kunsthistorische Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History), where the work wasclassified by Fred Meijer as by a follower of Steen, possibly Richard Brakenburgh.
6. In 1972 this painting was offered at an auction at Paul Brandt, Amsterdam on 16–19 May
1972, no. 92. In 1973 it was in the possession of L. Worms in Antwerp. It had formerly beenin the collection of H. E. ter Kuile, Enschede and was with the art dealer D. Katz in Dieren.
7. See, for instance, The Merry Family, in versions in the Rijksmuseum and in the Philadelphia
Museum of Art. See also The Marriage of Tobias and Sarah in Braunschweig and what ispresumed to be an earlier version on the art market. For these works, see, respectively, K.
Braun, Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen (Rotterdam, 1980), no. 134, no. 216, no. 281, and no.
308.
8. Children with toy windmills were seen as symbols of childlike innocence; see also the Dutch
expression “met molentjes lopen” (literally “to walk with windmills”).
© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 7 of 10

9. For an image of this painting, see H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, and Arthur K.
Wheelock Jr., Jan Steen, Painter and Storyteller , ed. Guido Jansen (Exh. cat. Washington
D.C., National Gallery of Art; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (New Haven and London, 1996),
124, fig. 3. This composition also survives in two versions. K. Braun,Alle schilderijen van
Jan Steen (Rotterdam, 1980), nos. B-65 and 65a, wrongly doubts the attribution of bothpaintings to Steen. The first piece, presumably Steen’s original, was shown at an exhibition
devoted to Steen that was held at the Mauritshuis, 1958/59, no. 8.
10. This latter painting was sold at auction in Vienna, Christie’s, 29–30 October 1996, no. 48, ill.
11. The few portraits by Steen, such as the famous Burgomaster of Delft and the four small
portraits that Steen made for Gerrit Schouten provide no support for an autographattribution. The Self-Portrait in the Rijksmuseum, which has a complicated genesis andshows that Steen had an unexpected side as a portraitist, is the closest in comparison to theoverpainted portrait. However, the similarities are insufficient grounds for an attribution. On
these portraits, see H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.,JanSteen, Painter and Storyteller, ed. Guido Jansen (Exh. cat. Washington D.C., National
Gallery of Art; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (New Haven and London, 1996), nos. 7, 29, 40.
12. See R. Baarsen et al., Nederlandse kunst in het Rijksmuseum 1700–1800 (Amsterdam,2006), no. 13 (text by Duncan Bull).

ProvenanceCharles-Auguste-Louis-Joseph de Morny (1811–65), Duc de Morny, Paris, by 1862.
E. Martinet Collection, Paris (his sale, Chevalier Duchesne, Paris, 27 February 1896, no.
39).
Boissière Collection, Paris (his sale, Chevallier, Hôtel Drouot, Paris, 19 February 1883, no.
46 [2,600 francs]).
Sir Joseph Robinson, Bart (1840–1929), London (his sale, Christie’s, London, 6 July 1923,no. 90, bought back); by descent to his daughter, Princess Ida Labia (1879–1961), CapeTown; by descent to her son (his sale, Sotheby’s, London, 7 December 1988, no. 97).
(Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 11 December 2003, no. 68 [Salomon Lilian B. V., Amsterdam]).
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 8 of 10London, Royal Academy of Arts, “The Robinson Collection: Paintings from the Collection ofthe late Sir J. B. Robinson, Bt.,” 2 July–14 September 1958, no. 43 [lent by the Princess IdaLabia].
Cape Town, South Africa, National Gallery of South Africa, “The Joseph Robinson
Collection Lent by the Princess Labia,” April 1959, no. 59 [lent by the Princess Ida Labia).
Zurich, Kunsthaus, “Sammlung Sir Joseph Robinson 1840–1929 Werke europäischerMalerei vom 15. bis 19 Jahrhundert,” 17 August–16 September 1962, no. 39 [lent by an heirof Princess Ida Labia].
Ithaca, NY, Cornell University, Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art, “An Eye For Detail: DutchPainting From The Leiden Collection,” 20 September 2014–21 June 2015 [lent by thepresent owner].

References
Vernier, Valery. Les Joyaux de la peinture: La Galerie de M. le comte de Morny . Paris,
1862, as by Jan Steen.
Legrange, Léon. “La Galerie de M. le duc de Morny.” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 14 (1863):
299–300, as by Jan Steen.
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, 1:67, no. 216, as by Jan Steen. Translated from Beschreibendes undkritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten holländischen Maler des XVII.
Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28.
“Collected by a South African Millionaire: Paintings from the Robinson Collection.” The
Illustrated London News 233, no. 6213 (1958): 30, as by Jan Steen.
“The Robinson Pictures (Capetown’s Gain: London’s Loss).” Connoisseur 142 (November,1958): 97, no. 7 and no. 43, as by Jan Steen.
Braun, Karel. Jan Steen: Alle tot nu toe bekende schilderijen . Rotterdam, 1980, 147, no.
A-125, as by Jan Steen.
Hecht, Peter. De Hollandse fijnschilders van Gerard Dou tot Adiaen van derWerff. Amsterdam, 1989, 128, as by Jan Steen.

Versions© 2017 The Leiden Collection

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 9 of 10Versions and Copies
1. Follower of Jan Steen, Wax Figure Seller, oil on panel, 51.5 x 41 cm, current whereabouts
unknown; formerly Engelbert Hendrik ter Kuile, Enschede; [D. Katz, Dieren]; (sale, PaulBrandt, Amsterdam, 16–19 May 1972, no. 92); L. Worms, Antwerp, by 1973.

Versions Notes

Technical Summary
The support, a single piece of fine, plain-weave fabric, has been lined. All four tacking margins
have been removed and paper tape extends into the face of the painting along all four sides.
Cusping and old turnover creases along all four outer edges of the composition suggest theoriginal image dimensions are about 2 cm smaller than the present stretcher dimensions in bothdirections. There are three paper labels but no wax seals, import stamps or stencils along thelining or stretcher.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied followed by paint applied with loose
fluid brushstrokes in thin, smooth, glazes and no use of impasto.[1]The X-radiograph reveals an earlier composition, a half-length portrait of a young male gazing at
the viewer, oriented upright, below the present composition.[2] No underdrawing is readily
apparent in infrared images captured at 780–1000 nanometers and there are no compositionalchanges visible in the images or as pentimenti.
The painting is unsigned and undated. A “JSteen” signature previously located along the upper
right corner of the architectural arch, was removed during a past conservation treatment
because it was found to be soluble and thus believed to be false.
The painting was cleaned and restored in Amsterdam in 2004 and remains in a good state ofpreservation.

Technical Summary Endnotes

1. The painting was examined on-site without a stereomicroscope. Magnification provided bya 5X Optivisor.
2. According to Dominique Suhr, Leiden Collection Curator, this male figure appears to beuncharacteristic of Steen and is probably by a different hand.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Demonstration of Wax Figures
Page 10 of 10© 2017 The Leiden Collection