Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Dominicus van Tol(Bodegraven? ca. 1635 – 1676 Leiden)

ca. 1664–65
oil on panel
30 x 23.3 cm
DT-100© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 2 of 10

How to cite
Aono, Junko. “Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 2nd ed.
Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/a-boy-with-amousetrap-by-candlelight/ (archived May 2020).
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 narrative
occurs.

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

Comparative Figures

wooden trap to show the viewer the mouse he has just captured. His
candle’s flame illuminates his excited face and the objects around him while
casting shadows onto the floor and walls. The differences in the delicate
rendering of brightly lit elements—the boy’s face, hair, white collar, and theforeground still life motifs—and the freely brushed shadows simulate theeffects of flickering candlelight.
The high quality of this small panel, as well as its charming details anddistinctive chiaroscuro effects, explains why it has been traditionallyattributed to Gerrit Dou (1613–75), Dominicus van Tol’s uncle and teacher.
Indeed, the painting has been attributed to Dou, who was known for his
virtuoso technique in the rendering of candlelit scenes throughout its
recorded history, dating back to 1739, when it appeared in an Amsterdam

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

auction.[1] Only in 1990, when Ronni Baer rejected the attribution to Dou, wasthe painting correctly associated with Dominicus van Tol.[2] In particular, thiswork closely resembles two other pictures by Van Tol: one with a similar
subject, Children with a Mousetrap in the Rijksmuseum (fig 1) and Children
at a Window Blowing Bubbles in The Leiden Collection (fig 2).[3] Not only are
the facial features and clothing of the boys in these three pictures similar, butalso the manner in which Van Tol modeled their forms.
An anonymous biographer from the second half of the eighteenth century
noted that Van Tol owed much to Dou’s artistry: “In our view, he came most
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 3 of 10

close to his uncle’s manner and adhered to it.” [4] Van Tol often adapted
Dou’s motifs and subjects in his own works—sometimes, as in this instance,
coming very close to the style of his master. Here, for example, he placed his

Fig 2. Dominicus van Tol, Children
at a Window Blowing Bubbles, oil
on panel, 27 x 21.6 cm, © The
Leiden Collection, New York,
DT-101

scene within an illusionistically painted stone window, a pictorial device Dou
frequently used.[5] Although Van Tol’s painterly technique is generally
somewhat broader than that of Dou, in this painting he adopted a refinedstyle to emulate his master. Van Tol’s subject also relates to a number ofDou’s works, including Wine Cellar (fig 3) of ca. 1660. Dou’s painting,depicting lovers surreptitiously meeting in a dimly-lit cellar illuminated by alantern and candle, includes still-life motifs similar to those in Boy with a
Mousetrap by Candlelight, including a mousetrap, a wooden barrel, a head ofcabbage and a milk jug.[6] Also important for Van Tol’s pictorial concept are
two paintings by Dou that depict a young boy, with a similarly round face andcurly blond hair, holding a mousetrap: Mousetrap, ca. 1650,[7] and another
work

known

(1673–1746).

[8]

today

only

from

a

mezzotintbyNicolaas

Verkolje

Van Tol’s picture is not dated, yet dendrochronologicalanalysis of the panel and the above mentioned similarity with Dou’s WineFig 3. Gerrit Dou, Wine Cellar—An
Allegory of Winter, ca. 1660, oil on
panel, 30.5 x 25.4 cm,
Hohenbuchau Collection, on
permanent loan to Leichtenstein,
The Princely Collections, Vienna

Cellar point to a plausible date around 1664–65.[9]Depictions of a boy with a mousetrap enjoyed great popularity among Dutch
painters of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, including
Quiringh Gerritsz. van Brekelenkam (1622/29–69/79), Eglon van der Neer
(1635/36–1703), Adriaen van der Werff (1659–1722), and Louis de Moni
(1698–1771).[10] At first glance the subject appears to be a portrayal of
everyday life, but the motif of the mousetrap could also convey an amorous
message. For instance, in Dou’s Wine Cellar, the flirtatious interaction of theyoung couple in a dark cellar combined with the presence of wine may
indicate that the mousetrap alludes to love’s sweet slavery or theFig 4. Daniel Heinsius, Emblem
from Emblemata Amatoria, 1621,
engraving, published Leiden, 44

entrapment of love, a connotation found in contemporary emblem books andproverbs.[11] One of Jacob Cat’s emblems in Sinne- en minnebeelden (1627)
illustrates a mouse caught in a trap and warns that those who are greedy inlove fall prey to the object of their desire. Daniel Heinsius, in an emblem in
his Emblemata Amatoria (Leiden, ca. 1621), also compares a man who
cannot live without love to a mouse, with no viable choice between a trap
and a cat (fig 4).[12]Although love’s seduction is not explicitly depicted in Van Tol’s painting, theintimate atmosphere of the dark cellar and the presence of the wine barrel
and the fowl, both of which had strong sexual associations, suggest that themousetrap alludes to love’s captivity.[13] Even the smiling boy displaying themousetrap may serve to communicate the dangers of love to innocent© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 4 of 10

youths.
Van Tol’s stylistic and iconographic dependence on Dou’s work indicatesthat he was intimately familiar with the master’s paintings when he createdthis scene. Since Van Tol became a member of the Leiden Guild of SaintLuke in 1664 at the relatively advanced age of 29, it is presumed that he had
previously worked as an assistant in the studio of his uncle and would haveremained close to him before he left Leiden for Utrecht in 1669.[14] This close
connection to Dou might explain why the picture has certain qualities strongly
reminiscent of the master’s work, as well as its subsequent long-standing
attribution to him.[15]Although we have no certain knowledge about Dou’s studio practice and his
collaboration with his pupils, a group of paintings by different hands reflecting
the master’s style suggest that he had a number of apprentices andstudents in his studio.[16] As is the case with the current picture, their pictures
were sometimes sold later as authentic works by the master, as noted by theeighteenth-century anonymous biographer mentioned above. When writing
about Jan Adriaensz. van Staveren (1614–69), another pupil of Dou, henotes that “art dealers have long been buying up the most and best work [byVan Staveren], together with other paintings by different pupils of Gerard
Dou, and selling these as paintings by Dou in foreign countries.”[17] The
attribution of the Leiden Collection picture to Dou was repeatedly authorized
by art dealers like Willem Lormier, the most prominent dealer of theeighteenth century. After Lormier’s death in 1763, the painting was sold at
auction and fetched 1,000 guilders—five times more than what he hadoriginally paid only two decades earlier.[18]- Junko Aono, 2017

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 5 of 10

Endnotes

1. See Willem Martin, “Het leven en de werken van Gerrit Dou” (PhD diss. Universiteit Leiden,1901), 241–42, no. 352, as by Dou; Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, A Catalogue Raisonné of theWorks of the Most Eminent Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work ofJohn Smith, ed. and trans. Edward G. Hawke, 8 vols. (London, 1907–28); originally publishedas Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten höllandischen
Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts, 10 vols. (Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28), 1: 14, no. 223, as by
Dou; Werner Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler, 6 vols. (Landau and Pfalz,
1983–94), 6: 3525, 3534, n. 75, as by Dou.
2. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (PhD diss. New York University,1990), no. C81. Because of the lack of a chronological overview of Van Tol’s work—only a few
extant works are dated—it remains difficult to assess the newly attributed picture within his
oeuvre. An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam) is dated 1673:
Pieter J. J. van Thiel, ed., All the Paintings of Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam: A Completely
Illustrated Catalogue (Amsterdam, 1976), no. SK-C-21. Cf. Eric Jan Sluijter, Marlies Enklaar,and Paul Niewenhuizen, eds., Leidse fijnschilders: van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris deJonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 235n1.
3. Pieter J. J. van Thiel, ed., All the Paintings of Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam: A Completely
Illustrated Catalogue (Amsterdam and Maarssen, 1976), no. SK-A-417; Eric Jan Sluijter,
Marlies Enklaar, and Paul Niewenhuizen, eds., Leidse fijnschilders: van Gerrit Dou tot Frans
van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal) (Zwolle,
1988), 235–36.
4. Anonymous, Lijst van schilders, die binnen de Stad Leijden gebooren zijn, off aldaar gewoond
en de kunst geoeffend hebben (Leiden, ca. 1776–85) (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Library,
LB254-41a, folio deel), biography of Van Tol: “Naar onze gedachten is hij ’t allernaast bij zijnooms manier gekomen en heeft zich daarbij gehouden.”
5. For other paintings with Van Tol’s typical window composition, see, for example, Woman witha Fowl in a Window (Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Kassel) and An Old Woman Winding Yarn
(Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden). Bernhard Schnackenburg, Gemäldegelerie Alte
Meister Gesamtkatalog, 2 vols. (Mainz, 1985), 297, no. GK 259; Annegret Laabs, The Leiden
fijnschilders from Dresden, ed. Christiaan Vogelaar (Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de
Lakenhal; Dresden, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen) (Zwolle,
2000), 119–21.
6. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (PhD diss., New York University,1990), no. 83; Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt,
ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.; Dulwich© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 6 of 10

Picture Gallery, London; Mauritshuis, The Hague) (New Haven, 2000), no. 23.
7. Quentin Buvelot, Michel Hilaire, and Olivier Zeder, eds. Tableaux flamands et hollandais duMusée Fabre de Montpellier (Exh. cat. Paris, Netherlands Institute; Montpellier, Fabre
Museum) (Paris, 1998), 47–51, no. 13; Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou(1613–1675)” (PhD diss., New York University, 1990), no. 55.
8. Junko Aono, “Reproducing the Golden Age: Copies after Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre
Painting in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century,” Oud Holland 121 (2008): 19–20, figs. 17,
18; idem, “De Gouden Eeuw in druk: Reproductieprenten van Nicolaas Verkolje,” in Nicolaas
Verkolje 1673–1746: De fluwelen hand, ed. Paul Knolle and Everhard Korthals Altes (Exh.
cat. Enschede, Rijksmuseum Twenthe) (Zwolle, 2011), 46. The location of Dou’s original isunknown: Annegret Laabs, The Leiden fijnschilders from Dresden, ed. Christiaan Vogelaar(Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal; Dresden, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister,
Staatliche Kunstsammlungen) (Zwolle, 2000), 127.
9. According to dendrochronogical analysis done by Peter Klein, the creation of the painting ispossible as of 1654, but more plausible as of 1664.
10. The picture by Van Brekelenkam in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (inv. no. SK-A-62), that by
Van der Neer in the Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, Cologne (inv. no. Dep-566), that by Van derWerff in the National Gallery, London (inv. no. 3049), and that by De Moni in an unknown
location(photograph

at

the

RKD

(Rijksbureau

voor

Kunsthistorische

Documentatie/Netherlands Institute for Art History), artwork no. 224516).
11. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (Ph.D. diss., New York University,1990), no. 83; idem, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt, ed.
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.; Dulwich Picture
Gallery, London; Mauritshuis, The Hague) (New Haven, 2000), 110.
12. Jacob Cats, Sinne- en minnebeelden (1627; reprint, The Hague, 1996), 1:102, no. 12; Daniel
Heinsius, Emblemata amatoria (Leiden, ca. 1621), 44. Heinsius’s engraving shows amousetrap in a cellar accompanied by a cupid in the background. For an illustration of thisemblem, and for further iconographic interpretations of the mousetrap, see Eddy de Jongh,Tot Lering en Vermaak: Betekenissen van Hollandse genrevoorstellingen in dezeventiende eeuw (exh. cat., Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (Amsterdam, 1976), 284–87.
13. In seventeenth-century genre paintings, the innocence of children was sometimes used toconvey moralistic messages for adult viewers, or even to act as a foil to the foolish behaviorof adults. Like in other pictures with the same theme, made by Eglon van der Neer or Adriaen
van der Werff, the young boy holding a mousetrap was not the object of sexual attention, but
plays a role as a messenger. Some have interpreted his role less innocently by comparing
him to a putto: Eric Jan Sluijter, Marlies Enklaar, and Paul Niewenhuizen, eds., Leidse
fijnschilders: van Gerrit Dou tot Frans van Mieris de Jonge 1630–1760 (Exh. cat. Leiden,
Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal) (Zwolle, 1988), 228. For sexual connotations of birds© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 7 of 10

depicted in genre paintings, see Eddy de Jongh, “Erotica in volgeperspectief: De
dubbelzinnigheid van een reeks 17de eeuwse genrevoorstellingen,” Simiolus 3 (1968–1969):
23–27, 35–41; Eric Jan Sluijter, Seductress of Sight: Studies in Dutch Art of the Golden Age(Zwolle, 2000), 278–81.
14. For biographic information on Van Tol’s life, see Piet Bakker’s biography in the current
catalogue.
15. It might also explain why the picture was not signed, which is not typical of Van Tol.
16. The paintings classified by Baer under “works of questionable attribution” belong to thisgroup, like The Kitchen Maid (Musée du Louvre, Paris, inv. no. 1217) and The Woman at theClavichord (sale, Christie’s, New York, 25 January 2012, lot no. 49). Ronni Baer, “The
Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)” (PhD diss. New York University, 1990), nos. B5, B6.
17. Lijst van schilders, die binnen de Stad Leijden gebooren zijn, off aldaar gewoond en de kunst
geoeffend hebben (Leiden, ca. 1776–85) (Regionaal Archief Leiden, Library, LB254-41a, foliodeel), biography of Van Staveren: “De konsthandelaars hebben de meesten en besten,
benevens meer anderen van verscheijde leerlingen van Gerard Douw, al overlang opgekogt,
en buijtenslands voor schilderijen van Douw verkogt.”
18. The picture initially cost Lormier 200 guilders in 1744. Whether Lormier ever noticed andintentionally overlooked the hand of another artist in this panel remains unproven: sale, The
Hague, 25 February 1744, no. 1 [200 florins to W. Lormier from Block], as by Dou; sale,
Willem Lormier, The Hague, 4 July 1763, no. 66 [1,000 florins to Voet], as by Dou.

Provenance(Sale, Amsterdam, 21 October 1739, no. 26 [for 300 florins], as by Dou).
Gerard Block (?) (his sale, The Hague, 25 February 1744, no. 1 [200 florins to W. Lormier; toFrank for 525 florins, 4 June 1756], as by Dou).
Jan Willem Frank, The Hague [to Lormier, 9 March 1758 (his sale, The Hague, 4 July 1763,
no. 66), 1,000 florins to Voet], as by Dou.
(Sale, Amsterdam, 17 April 1783, no. 70, as by Dou).
H. A. van den Heuvel (his sale, Utrecht, 27 June 1825, no. 16 [unsold at 1,500 florins], as byDou); (his sale, Utrecht, 27 April 1827, no. 8 [unsold at 425 florins], as by Dou).
(Sale, C. Kruseman and J. van der Dussen van Zouteveen, Amsterdam, 16 February 1858,
no. 21, as by Dou; or possibly no. 320 [41 florins to Glaser], as by Dou)
Werner Dahl, Düsseldorf, by 1886 (his sale, Amsterdam, 17 October 1905, no. 39 [6,700
florins to Van Gelder], as by Dou).
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 8 of 10

Possibly Collection Lubelling, by 1929.
Hendrik Cornelis van den Honert (1854–1916), Baarn, by 1946; by descent to Magdalena
Christiana van den Honert (1899–1979), Baarn/Hilversum (sale, Sotheby’s Mak van Waay,
Amsterdam, 22 April 1980, no. 28 [to David Koetser Gallery, Zurich, 1980], as by Dou).
Private collection, Germany (sale, Koller, Zurich, 10 September 1998, no. 41 [unsold], as byDou); [Salomon Lilian B. V., Amsterdam, 2005].
From whom acquired by the present owner.

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

References
Catalogus van schilderyen van den heer agent Willem Lormier in ’s Gravenhage. The Hague,
1752, no. 69 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Hoet, Gerard. Catalogus of Naamlyst van Schilderyen, met derzelver pryzen, zedert een
langen reeks van jaaren zoo. 3 vols. The Hague, 1752, 2: 421 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Descamps, Jean Baptiste La vie des peintres flamands, allemands et hollandois: avec desportraits gravés en taille-douce, une indication de leurs principaux ouvrages & des réflexions
sur leurs différentes manières. 4 vols. Paris, 1753–64, 224 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Smith, John. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish andFrench Painters. 9 vols. London, 1829–42, 1: 7, no. 15 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Leven, Theodor. Verzeichniss der in der Kunsthalle zu Düsseldorf ausgestellten Bilder vonälteren Meisteren. Exh. cat. Düsseldorf, Kunsthalle. Düsseldorf, 1886, 22, no. 80 (as by Gerrit
Dou).
Leven,

Theodor.

“Die

Ausstellungvon

Bildernälterer

Meisterzu© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 9 of 10

Düsseldorf.” Kunstchronik 22, no. 29 (28 April 1887): 490–91 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Von Bode, Wilhelm. “Die Ausstellungen alter Gemälde aus Privatbesitz in Düsseldorf undBrüssel im Herbst 1886.” Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft 10 (1887): 33 (as by Gerrit
Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. “Het leven en de werken van Gerrit Dou.” PhD diss, Universiteit Leiden.
Leiden, 1901, 241–42, no. 352 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou. Translated from Dutch by Clara Bell. London, 1902, 128, no.
125 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch
Painters of the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work of John Smith. Edited and translatedby Edward G. Hawke, 1:421, no. 223. 8 vols. London, 1907–28. Originally published as
Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten holländischen
Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre. Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et lesmarchaunds au dix septième siècle. Paris, 1911, 208–9, no. 280 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde in 247 Abbildungen. Klassiker der Kunst
in Gesamatausgaben 24. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1913, 151 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhem. “Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen (Mauritshuis).” Verslagen omtrent ’s
Rijks Verzamelingen van Geschiedenis en Kunst 1932. LV (1933) 29 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Sumowski, Werner. Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler. 6 vols. Landau and Pfalz, 1983–94,
6:3525, 3534, no. 75 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Baer, Ronni. “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675)”. 3 vols. PhD diss. New York
University. New York, 1990, no. C81 (as rejected attribution of Gerrit Dou).
Korthals Altes, Everhard. “The eighteenth-century gentleman dealer Willem Lormier and theinternational dispersal of seventeenth-century Dutch paintings.” Simiolus 28 (2000–01): 267,
fig. 17; 309, no. 47 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Korthals Altes, Everhard. De verovering van de internationale kunstmarkt door dezeventiende-eeuwse schilderkunst: enkele studies over de verspreiding van Hollandse
schilderijen in de eerste helft van de achttiende eeuw. Leiden, 2003, 76–77, fig. 28; 282, no.
47 (as by Gerrit Dou).

Technical Summary
The support, a single plank of vertically grained, rectangular, non-Baltic oak,[1] has bevels on
three sides.[2] The panel is unthinned and uncradled and has no machine tool marks. There is one
paper label and four label fragments, but no wax collection seals, import stamps or panel maker’s© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Boy with a Mousetrap by Candlelight
Page 10 of 10

marks.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied followed by paint that has been thinly
and smoothly applied with no use of impasto. Areas of low brushmarking outline the architecturalarch, the figure’s drapery folds, and the jug, bowl, and cabbage along the lower right corner.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images at 780–1000 nanometers, and nocompositional changes are noted aside from the tip of the ring finger of the figure’s proper left
hand, which appears to have been extended during the paint stage.
The painting is unsigned and undated.
The painting was cleaned and restored in 2007 and remains in a good state of preservation.

Technical Summary Endnotes

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

© 2020 The Leiden Collection