Sculpted in the round.

A crack in the girl’s neck has been repaired and filled. There is some damage to her nose. Some of the toes on both of the girl’s feet are missing, as well as part of her plait. The boy’s right arm is missing and there is damage to his nose and cheek. The back right corner of the animal hide he is wearing is missing.

…; excavated at the site of Huis Noorthey, Veur, c. 1900;¹¹Correspondence Jonkheer H. van der Wijck, Doorn, 1969 and advertisement by the dealer C. Krijzer in Oude Kunst, February 1916. …; the dealer C. Krijzer, Rotterdam/The Hague, before September 1916;²²Advertisements in Oude Kunst, February 1916 and September 1917.…; collection Dr Fritz Mannheimer (1890-1939), Amsterdam and Paris, before 1933;³³Photo album ‘Het huis van Dr F. Mannheimer, Amsterdam’, 1928-32, Rijksmuseum, inv. nos. B-F-1963-426-2 and B-F-1963-426-3. from whom, fl. 6,350,000, en bloc, to Artistic & General Securities Ltd. as security for a loan from the Mendelssohn & Co. Bank, but kept in usufruct, 1934;⁴⁴NHA, 476, RMA Archive, inv. no. 2142, Recapitulatie der geïnventariseerde kunstvoorwerpen van wijlen Dr F. Mannheimer, undated, p. 99, nos. Bk 60 a-b, Artistic no. 42/18; NHA, 233, Arrondissementsrechtbank Amsterdam, inv. no. 1365, ‘O.R. 256/1939, Faillissementsdossier: nalatenschap Dr. F. Mannheimer, 28 augustus 1939’, image 3, page 2. purchased from Mendelssohn & Co. Bank, en bloc, by the Dienststelle Mühlmann, The Hague, for Adolf Hitler’s Führermuseum, Linz and transferred to Hohenfurt Monastery, Bohemia, 1940;⁵⁵E.J. Korthals Altes, Verzameling Mannheimer, Amsterdam 1974, pp. 21-22; F. Kieslinger, Sichergestellte Kunstwerke in den besetzten Niederlandischen Gebieten, Vienna 1941, no. 885 (Bk. 60). war recuperation, SNK, 1945;⁶⁶HNA, SNK Archive, 2.08.42, inv. no. 548. on loan, with 1,702 other objects, from the DRVK to the museum, 1953; Note RMA.} transferred to the museum, 1960

Object number: BK-16988-B

In the second half of the seventeenth century and the first half of the eighteenth, figures of children (kinderkens or putti) in all manner of allegorical forms were highly popular subjects for garden sculpture. They usually formed ensembles of four or five figures, together representing the Seasons, the Elements or the Senses, for example. The present two pieces make up a set of two groups depicting Hate (BK-16988-A) and Love (shown here). In one group a human girl and a boy satyr are fighting with each other, whereas in the other a human boy and a girl satyr are locked in a loving embrace, while trampling a Medusa head, here a symbol for hate or envy.

In 1973 Leeuwenberg ascribed the figures to Jacob Vennekool (also Vennecool).⁷⁷J. Leeuwenberg with the assistance of W. Halsema-Kubes, Beeldhouwkunst in het Rijksmuseum, coll. cat. Amsterdam 1973, p. 264. For Vennekool see J. Belonje, ‘Jacob Vennekool’, Oud Holland 63 (1948), pp. 205-08 and P.M. Fischer, Ignatius en Jan van Logteren: Beeldhouwers en stuckunstenaars in het Amsterdam van de 18e eeuw, Alphen aan de Rijn 2005, pp. 38-40. This was based solely on the resemblance to two groups of children in sandstone on the pillars of the front gateposts, erected in 1712, at the former Schermerpoort, a citygate, of Alkmaar, which for no clear reason was attributed to Jacob Vennekool. That obscure stonemason, who worked in Alkmaar from 1709 until his death in 1711, was thought to belong to the Amsterdam family of architects and builders merchants of the same name.⁸⁸First (?) mentioned as such in De Voorloopige Lijst der Nederlandsche Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst, V, De Provincie Noord-Holland, Utrecht 1921, p. 5. For the Vennekool family, see A. Hoynck van Papendrecht, ‘Het “constrijcke” geslacht Vennekool’, De Nederlandse Leeuw 41 (1923), pp. 334-39 and H. Janse, ‘Het geslacht Vennecool, bouwmeesters en handelaren in bouwmaterialen’, Bulletin KNOB 78 (1979), pp. 39-40. However, there is absolutely no concrete evidence that he created the figures on the Schermerspoort, and in the absence of any other documented work, or sculpture signed by Vennekool, the piece cannot be ascribed to him on stylistic grounds either. It is highly debatable whether Vennekool actually worked as a sculptor. His registration in the guild of St Luke sheds no light on that, and the few records in which he appears, mention him only as the maker of applied works such as urns and pedestals.⁹⁹See F.D.O. Obreen, Archief voor Nederlandsche kunstgeschiedenis: Verzameling van meerendeels onuitgegeven berichten en mededeelingen betreffende Nederlandsche schilders, plaatsnijders, beeldhouwers, bouwmeesters, juweliers, goud- en zilverdrijvers..., vol. 2, 1879-80, p. 37 and J. Belonje, ‘Jacob Vennekool’, Oud Holland 63 (1948), pp. 205-08.

Upon further consideration, the Alkmaar groups would appear to originate from the Antwerp Baurscheit workshop. The repertoire of Jan Pieter van Baurscheit I (1669-1728) and his son of the same name, Jan Pieter van Baurscheit II (1699-1768) contains the same romanticized children, with compact, loosely modelled bodies and expressive countenances (cf. BK-1967-19).¹⁰¹⁰For father and son Baurscheit see, for example, A. Jansen and C. Van Herck, ‘J.P. Van Baurscheit I en J.P. Van Baurscheit II: Antwerpsche beeldhouwers uit de 18e eeuw’, XVIIIe Jaarboek van den Koninklijken Oudheidkundigen Kring van Antwerpen, 1942, pp. 1-74; A. Staring, ‘Aanteekeningen op de Hollandse beeldhouwwerken van J.P. van Baurscheit, vader en zoon’, Oudheidkundig Jaarboek 13 (1946), pp. 40-49; F. Baudouin, ‘Enkele beeldhouwwerken van Jan Pieter van Baurscheit, vader en zoon’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 21 (1970), pp. 187-98; for the work of the son as an architect, see I.M. Breedveldt Boer, Tekenen en Vasseren: Het bedrijf van Jan Peter van Baurscheit (1699-1768) en de architectuur in het tweede kwart van de achttiende eeuw, 2003 (diss., Universiteit Utrecht). An additional argument supporting this alternative attribution is formed by two old drawings of the Schermerpoort, which suggest that the groups were only placed on the front gateposts at a later date, between 1727 and 1735.¹¹¹¹In the first drawing the pillars of the front gatepost are still unadorned: C. Pronk, Schermer Poort. tot Alkmaar, drawing, 1727, Alkmaar, Regionaal Archief, inv. no. PR 1000764. In the second, the groups of children are depicted for the first time: P. van Looy, Het Schermerhek met wapens en beelden, brug en poort, recht van voren, ink on paper, 1889 after the drawing by ‘O.W.’ of 1735, Alkmaar, Regionaal Archief, inv. no. PR 1000771. While the Baurscheit workshop was still producing such sandstone ensembles in considerable numbers, Vennekool had been dead for decades.

As Fischer had already argued, the Amsterdam figures could also be ascribed to the Baurscheit workshop.¹²¹²P.M. Fischer, Ignatius en Jan van Logteren: Beeldhouwers en stuckunstenaars in het Amsterdam van de 18e eeuw, Alphen aan de Rijn 2005, p. 40. However, unlike the more classicist Alkmaar groups of figures, these correspond to the more baroque type of garden statuary from the repertoire of the said workshop, set apart by their greater expressivity. They can be compared with a marble group of putti dating from 1721 and signed by Jan Pieter van Baurscheit I (whereabouts unknown).¹³¹³Art dealer Charles Ratton & Guy Ladrière, Paris, Burlington Magazine 130 (1988), p. xxvii (ill.). The putti have similar toddler-like bodies, with fairly muscular abdomens, plump hands and feet, somewhat uniform faces, chubby cheeks, mischievous expressions, stylishly pinned-up hair (for the girls) and dynamic poses with raised arms. In addition, a similar trampled head of Medusa also occurs in the PVB IF monogrammed marble group of children portraying Fame (Art and History Museum, Brussels),¹⁴¹⁴G. Derveaux-Van Ussel, ‘Beeldhouwwerk van Jan-Pieter van Baurscheit, vader en zoon’, Bulletin van de Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis 55 (1984), 93-105, figs. 7-8. and the countenance of Medusa with wide open mouth, deeply grooved corners of the mouth and sharp jaw-line greatly resembles that of Cacus in the PVB monogrammed group with Hercules in the Rijksmuseum collection (BK-NM-13215-C). However, the rather squat and plumper type of putto in the Amsterdam group is most related in appearance to two unsigned sandstone sets featuring children, depicting the senses of Smell (a girl with a rose) and Touch (a boy with a parrot biting the putto’s ear), which are also attributed to the Baurscheit workshop.¹⁵¹⁵V&V Fine Arts, Amsterdam at Breda Antiques Fair in 1998, h. 192 (incl. plinth), as ‘Michael Emanuel Shee, first half of the 18th century’, photo in Object File RMA. Lastly, there is a comparable piece, but of lesser quality, that is difficult to interpret iconographically. It too is in sandstone and unsigned. It consists of a group of two children with a dove and a salamander, and, on the ground an owl and two putti heads which have already been associated with the present groups.¹⁶¹⁶Van Nie Antiquairs, Amsterdam 2010, h. 81 cm, as ‘circle of Jacob Vennekool’, photo in Object File RMA. The fact that Baurscheit was by no means unfamiliar with the iconography used in the Amsterdam groups is evidenced by the two groups of children representing Love and Hate on the terrace of Harewood House in England on which he had inscribed PVBaurscheit I.F.A. 1725.¹⁷¹⁷E.V. Buitenhuis, De tuinsieraadkunst in de Hollandse tuin, 1983 (unpublished thesis, Leiden University), appendix IIA, no. 6.

The Amsterdam pieces were excavated round 1900, together with their concomitant pedestals (lost meanwhile, early in the twentieth century).¹⁸¹⁸Prior to 1928 the groups had already been given their present, taller pedestals, as can be seen in a photo of the garden of the former owner, Fritz Mannheimer, inv. no. B-F-1963-426-2. in the grounds of the erstwhile House Schakenbosch (or Schaakenbos) in Veur (Leidschendam, as it is today). When the mansion was converted into a boarding school for boys (Instituut Noorthey) around 1825, they were probably discarded and ended up in the ground. Before that, the estate had been owned by two related families, Paets and Noorthey, from Rotterdam.¹⁹¹⁹The Hague, National Archives, archives Petrus de Raadt, no. 3.20.47.

Based on the particular shape and style of the original pedestals, the garden figures can be dated quite accurately to circa 1720-30.²⁰²⁰With thanks to Dirk-Jan Biemond, RMA. Consequently, Jacob Noorthey (b. 1707) is the most likely patron. Like his father-in-law Adriaen Paets (1657-1712) from whom he inherited Schakenbosch,²¹²¹For records originating from the owners of Noorthey estate, see The Hague, National Archives, no. 3.20.47. this former Rotterdam sheriff and administrator of the Dutch East India Company (VOC), had previously had dealings with Jan Pieter van Baurscheit I.²²²²For Adriaen Paets and Jacob Noorthey as patrons of Jan Pieter Baurscheit I, see F. Lammertse, ‘Four Letters from Adriaen van der Werff to the Antwerp Sculptor Jan Peter van Baurscheit’, Simiolus 34 (2009-10), pp. 119-41, esp. pp. 130-32. This is confirmed by two sandstone statues of Ceres and Flora, monogrammed PVB and dated 1712 which topped the entrance to the merchant’s house at 46 Haringvliet (‘The House with the Statues’) in Rotterdam, which were designed for him by the famous painter Adriaen van der Werff (1659-1722).²³²³Currently in Museum Rotterdam (previously Historical Museum), see F. Lammertse, ‘Four Letters from Adriaen van der Werff to the Antwerp Sculptor Jan Peter van Baurscheit’, Simiolus 34 (2009-10), pp. 119-41, esp. figs. 14, 15.

Bieke van der Mark, 2025

C.W. Dubbelaar, H.-J. Tolboom, N. Verhulst et al., ‘De brugbeelden en tuinsculpturen van kasteel Amerongen: Materiaal, historie, conditie en conservering’, Geological Survey of Belgium Professional Paper (2014) no. 1, pp. 45-46, note 10

B. van der Mark, 2025, 'attributed to workshop of Jan Pieter van (I) Baurscheit, A Boy and a Satyr Girl Fighting, Allegory of Hate, Antwerp, c. 1720 - c. 1730', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/200116046