Support The fine, plain-weave canvas has been wax-resin lined. All tacking edges have been preserved and there are selvedges at the top and bottom. Judging by the crack pattern parallel to the outer edges and in the centre, the bars of the original strainer were approx. 6 cm wide and the vertical crossbar approx. 7 cm.
Preparatory layers The double ground extends up to the edge of the canvas at the top, up to the bottom tacking edge and over the ones on the left and right. It consists of a light beige layer, followed by another light beige layer.
Underdrawing Infrared reflectography revealed lines throughout the landscape in both a dry and liquid medium, some of which are also visible to the naked eye. Numerous parallel, horizontal lines position the buildings. The walls, main roads, canals and larger architectural elements were prepared with very fine, detailed drawing. Loose, wet brushstrokes indicate the outlines of the marshy lands surrounding the city. One or two steeples were not included in the painted version.
Paint layers The paint extends up to the edge of the canvas at the top, up to the bottom tacking edge and over the ones on the left and right. After the architectural elements and canals had been carefully rendered with delicate wet-in-wet blending at transitions, the water with the marshy lands and the bluish hills were loosely brushed up to and around the city. The highest spires in the background appear to have been completed next, extending over the range of hills. The small boats, reflections and shadows were added on the water, followed by the rocks and stones and figures in the foreground. The painting technique is direct with fine brushstrokes throughout and sparing use of slight impasto.
Laurent Sozzani [publication date 2026]

Fair. The paint is slightly abraded throughout. There are old, repaired tears in the lower left quadrant and considerable overpaint in the sky, water and foreground. The varnish is uneven and has yellowed.

For the present painting (SK-A-4477) and six other Asian views (SK-A-4471 to 4476)
Commissioned from the workshop of Johannes Vingboons, with three other paintings, for fl. 1,040, by the Amsterdam chamber of the Dutch East India Company (VOC), before 30 April 1663;¹¹NATH, VOC Archives, acc. no. 1.04.02, inv. no. 4583, Generale staten 1642-1678, 30 April 1663; see K. Zandvliet, Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans and Topographic Paintings and their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the 16th and 17th Centuries, Amsterdam 1998, p. 270. According to the bookkeeper of the Amsterdam VOC chamber, the other chambers (of Middelburg, Hoorn, Enkhuizen, Delft and Rotterdam) owed it a total of 520 guilders for a series of ten paintings. The money had already been paid to David Vingboons. It is assumed that the Amsterdam chamber itself was responsible for half of the invoice, which would mean that the entire sum for the series was 1,040 guilders; see ibid., p. 270. ? recorded in East India House, Hoogstraat, Amsterdam, 1663,²²O. Dapper, Historische beschryving der stadt Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1663, p. 448: ‘In de zael daer de Bewinthebbers vergaderen […] hangen rontom d’Eylanden van de Molukken, slooten, bosschaedjens, dicht van specery-boomen, steden, havens, kapen, die wy aen het anderen eint des werelts bezitten. Daer hangen uitgeschildert de plaetzen, dicht by China gelegen, waer aen men speurt wat een gunst de Nederlanders by verre gelege volken dagelijx meer en meer vinden’. 1664³³F. von Zesen, Beschreibung der Stadt Amsterdam: Darinnen von Derselben ersten Ursprunge bis auf gegenwärtigen Zustand, ihr unterschiedlicher Anwachs, herliche Vorrechte und in mehr als 70 Kupfer-stükken entworfene fürnehmste Gebeue [...] vor augen gestellet werden, Amsterdam 1664, p. 315: ‘Ja noch mehr dergleichen gemahlte tafeln und abrisse, wie auch allerhand seltzame Ost-Indische gewächse siehet man in den andern sählen und kammern’. and 1765;⁴⁴J. Wagenaar, Amsterdam in zyne opkomst, aanwas, geschiedenissen, voorregten, koophandel, gebouwen, kerkenstaat, schoolen, schutterye, gilden en regeeringe, II, Amsterdam 1761, p. 83: ‘In sommigen [kamers], daar de Bewindhebbers vergaderen, zyn eenige Chineesche en andere Schilderyen geplaatst’. transferred to the Ministry of the Colonies, The Hague, between 1831 and 1847;⁵⁵In 1831 paintings from the Koloniaal Magazijn (Colonial Storehouse) in East India House were given to the Ministry of the Colonies, which was transferred from Amsterdam to The Hague in the same year; see J.C. Overvoorde, ‘Gebouwen der O.I. Compagnie: Amsterdam’, Bulletin Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 29 (1928), pp. 17-55, esp. p. 32. It is assumed that the present series of seven paintings was among those mentioned. A document of 1847 about shipments from the Ministry of the Colonies mentions all ten pictures; see K. Zandvliet, Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans and Topographic Paintings and their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the 16th and 17th Centuries, Amsterdam 1998, p. 270. recorded in the attic of the Ministry of the Colonies, 1873;⁶⁶V. de Stuers, Holland op zijn smalst, Amsterdam 1873, p. 34. transferred to the Nederlandsch Museum voor Geschiedenis en Kunst, The Hague (inv. nos. 2853-59), 1876;⁷⁷Notes RMA. The paintings with inv. nos. 2858 (SK-A-4476) and 2859 (SK-A-4477) were badly damaged. transferred to the museum, 1885

Object number: SK-A-4477

The entire series of Asian views

In Holland op zijn smalst (Holland at its Meanest), his famous pamphlet of 1873 about the abominable condition of the nation’s cultural heritage and the lack of interest in it, Victor de Stuers noted that a discovery had been made at the Ministry of the Colonies in The Hague of ‘a series, not for art but for history, of most remarkable paintings from the seventeenth century depicting our former trading posts in India and the East Indies, namely Judea [Bangkok], Neijra [Banda Neira], Eawec [Khum Peam Lvek], Raaiebaagh [Raybag], Canton, Couchijn [Kochi], Cananor [Kannur]. These works, which have been partly torn to shreds, were recently discovered in the peat loft.’⁸⁸V. de Stuers, Holland op zijn smalst, Amsterdam 1873, p. 34. The seven paintings belonged to a series of ten that was removed from East India House, the headquarters of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) in Amsterdam, between 1831 and 1847.⁹⁹See Provenance to the painting under discussion here. Three of them were thrown away between 1848 and 1873, probably because they were damaged beyond repair.¹⁰¹⁰These works were mentioned in a 1847 document from the Ministry of the Colonies in The Hague regarding shipments (see K. Zandvliet, Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans and Topographic Paintings and their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the 16th and 17th Centuries, Amsterdam 1998, p. 270): De Chom van Suhalij (The Bay of Suvali near Surat, India), De Stadt en het Casteel Souratte (The town and castle of Surat, India) and Visiapour (Bijapur, India). An anonymous official inserted an addendum to the document at an unknown date stating that the three paintings had been destroyed. In 1663 the Amsterdam chamber of the VOC paid 520 guilders for the complete series to David Vingboons, one of Johannes’s younger brothers who was probably acting as the representative of the family workshop.¹¹¹¹See Provenance to the painting under discussion here. The purchase may have been connected with the partial rebuilding of East India House between 1658 and 1661.¹²¹²K. Zandvliet, Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans and Topographic Paintings and their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the 16th and 17th Centuries, Amsterdam 1998, p. 270; K. Zandvliet (ed.), The Dutch Encounter with Asia 1600-1950, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2002-03, p. 169. It is not certain where the paintings hung, but the general consensus is that they were in the directors’ conference room, although the well-known drawing of that room by Simon Fokke fails to resolve the issue.¹³¹³RP-P-OB-84.691. The only painting in the drawing that can be identified with some certainty is Andries Beeckman’s View of Batavia over the mantelpiece (see SK-A-19). According to R. van Gelder and L. Wagenaar, Sporen van de Compagnie: De VOC in Nederland, Amsterdam 1988, p. 67, the paintings to the left of the fireplace are the view of possibly Raybag in the Vingboons series (SK-A-4473) and an anonymous bird’s-eye view of Ambon (SK-A-4482). There is no agreement on the original location of the conference room in the building or on its size and decoration; see J.J. Jehee, ‘De plaats van de grote zaal in het Oost-Indisch Huis te Amsterdam: Wat zegt het gebouw nu zelf?’, Bulletin Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 101 (2002), pp. 41-48; E.H. Mattie and C. van Soestbergen, ‘Het Oost Indisch Huis te Amsterdam: Problemen bij de reconstructie van een historisch interieur’, Bulletin Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 100 (2001), pp. 93-99, esp. pp. 96-97. See W. Jeeninga, Het Oostindisch Huis en het Sint Jorishof te Amsterdam/The East Indies House and St Jorishof, Zwolle 1995, pp. 16-39, for the construction, rebuilding, layout and decoration of East India House.

The Amsterdam chamber paid David Vingboons for the series but it is not clear who was responsible for the individual works, whether more than one person was involved and, if so, who had which share. No other paintings from the Vingboons studio have survived, so it is impossible to distinguish between the hands of the various family members. In any event, the scenes are based on models that Johannes also used for his atlases, and oddly enough the pictures were made a few years before the only atlases that can be dated with certainty – those of Cosimo III de’ Medici and Laurens van der Hem of 1667-68.¹⁴¹⁴E. de Groot, The World of a 17th-Century Collector: The Atlas Blaeu-Van der Hem, ’t Goy-Houten 2006, pp. 188-90. Since David left no autonomous works at all, and Johannes was the only one who is known for certain to have been in touch with Joan Blaeu, it is assumed that the series was made under his supervision. In fact, Johannes probably managed the workshop and was responsible for its output, for the eldest son, Pieter, had died long before, and Philips, the next in line, had left home.

The accounts of travellers and the city’s chroniclers show that East India House was one of Amsterdam’s main sights in the seventeenth century.¹⁵¹⁵J.I. Pontanus, Historische Beschrijvinghe der seer wijt beroemde Coop-Stadt Amsterdam: Eerst int Latijn ghestelt ende beschreven door Ioh. Isacium Pontanum ende by den selven oock naderhandt neerstich oversien ende op veel plaetsen vermeerdert ende verbetert: Ende nu wt des Autheurs laetste Copije in Nederduyts overgheset door Petrum Montanum, Amsterdam 1614, p. 145; O. Dapper, Historische beschryving der stadt Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1663, p. 448; F. von Zesen, Beschreibung der Stadt Amsterdam: Darinnen von Derselben ersten Ursprunge bis auf gegenwärtigen Zustand, ihr unterschiedlicher Anwachs, herliche Vorrechte und in mehr als 70 Kupfer-stükken entworfene fürnehmste Gebeue (...) vor augen gestellet werden, Amsterdam 1664, pp. 312-14. Cosimo III de’ Medici visited it on several occasions; see G.J. Hoogewerf, De twee reizen van Cosimo de’ Medici, prins van Toscane, door de Nederlanden (1667-1669): Journalen en documenten, Amsterdam 1919, pp. 43, 163, 274, 279. It contained many exotic curios, and the walls were covered with paintings and maps that gave an idea of the places in the Far East where the VOC had a presence.¹⁶¹⁶W. Jeeninga, Het Oostindisch Huis en het Sint Jorishof te Amsterdam/The East Indies House and St Jorishof, Zwolle 1995, pp. 32-39. The series of Asian views from the Vingboons workshop fitted in with them perfectly. It is generally assumed that they are depictions of the main Dutch factories in the Far East and locations where the Dutch had trading posts.¹⁷¹⁷K. Zandvliet (ed.), The Dutch Encounter with Asia 1600-1950, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2002-03, pp. 169-70. Some of them, though, played no significant role in Dutch-Asian relations and in others there was no VOC representative around 1663. Only a few of the most important places with which the VOC traded featured in the decorative programme of East India House. First and foremost there is Andries Beeckman’s View of Batavia.¹⁸¹⁸SK-A-19. Neither the sources nor surviving paintings inform us that there were depictions in East India House of trading stations such as Deshima, Makassar, Malacca, Hooghly-Chinsurah, Colombo, Galle, Nagapattinam and Vengurla, where the Dutch had offices or factories or both. Their importance was immeasurably greater than that of Raybag, Khum Peam Lvek and Ayutthaya, or even Bijapur in the Vingboons series.¹⁹¹⁹For the first three places see SK-A-4473, SK-A-4475 and SK-A-4477. The view of Bijapur is one of the three paintings thrown away. This of course raises the question as to why he painted the sites that he did. Did the Amsterdam chamber already have other scenes that have since been lost?²⁰²⁰One work that is mentioned in all the sources but is no longer known is described as ‘the court of the King of China’ in J.I. Pontanus, Historische Beschrijvinghe der seer wijt beroemde Coop-Stadt Amsterdam: Eerst int Latijn ghestelt ende beschreven door Ioh. Isacium Pontanum ende by den selven oock naderhandt neerstich oversien ende op veel plaetsen vermeerdert ende verbetert: Ende nu wt des Autheurs laetste Copije in Nederduyts overgheset door Petrum Montanum, Amsterdam 1614, p. 145. O. Dapper, Historische beschryving der stadt Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1663, p. 448, was probably referring to the same picture when he spoke of ‘Chinese and Japanese paintings’. J. Wagenaar, Amsterdam in zyne opkomst, aanwas, geschiedenissen, voorregten, koophandel, gebouwen, kerkenstaat, schoolen, schutterye, gilden en regeeringe, II, Amsterdam 1761, p. 83, also writes about ‘some Chinese (…) paintings’. M. Gosselink, ‘Johannes Vingboons’, in M. Gosselink, Land in zicht: Vingboons tekent de wereld van de 17de eeuw, exh. cat. Rotterdam (Kunsthal) 2007, p. 155, note 6, believes that Pontanus did not mean the court in Beijing but the castle of Osaka, which is known from a watercolour copy by Vingboons. Whatever the truth of the matter, the painting has not survived. Was Vingboons’s selection arbitrary, or does it reflect the ambitions cherished by the VOC in the early 1660s? The fact that four of the ten views are of places on or near the Malabar Coast in the south-west of India that were captured from the Portuguese in 1661 and 1663 might suggest this.²¹²¹They are the views of Kochi (SK-A-4471), Kannur (SK-A-4472) and possibly Raybag (SK-A-4473), and the one of Bijapur (lost). There had also been recent developments at the Cambodian and Thai lodges.²²²²See SK-A-4475 and SK-A-4477 respectively. Damaged relations with both countries were mended in 1664. In addition, the VOC sent fresh diplomatic missions to China in 1663 and 1665, which may have been a reason to depict Guangzhou.²³²³SK-A-4474. L. Blussé, Tribuut aan China: Vier eeuwen Nederlands-Chinese betrekkingen, Amsterdam 1989, p. 82. One thing that militates against that theory, though, is that the VOC had been in some of these locations, such as Banda Neira and Surat, uninterruptedly since the beginning of the seventeenth century.²⁴²⁴For Banda Neira see SK-A-4476. Two paintings of or near Surat in the Vingboons series are among the three paintings lost.

Erlend de Groot [publication date 2026]

Surrounded by a network of rivers and criss-crossed by canals, Ayutthaya was regarded as the Venice of the East in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.²⁷²⁷F. Valentijn, Oud en Nieuw Oost Indiën, vervattende een naauwkeurige en uitvoerige verhandelinge van Nederlands mogentheyd in die gewesten, III.2, Dordrecht/Amsterdam 1726, p. 59. According to Joost Schouten, chief merchant and trade director of the local office of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) in 1636, the city was ‘beautified with more than three hundred fair Temples and Cloysters, all curiously builded, and adorned with many gilt Towers, Pyramids, and Pictures without number’.²⁸²⁸F. Caron and J. Schouten, A True Description of the Mighty Kingdoms of Japan and Siam: Written Originally in Dutch (…) and Now Rendred into English by Capt. Roger Manley, London 1671, p. 125. Standing on the north side was ‘the great and magnificent King’s Palace […] many of its Buildings and Towers being entirely gilt.²⁹²⁹F. Caron and J. Schouten, A True Description of the Mighty Kingdoms of Japan and Siam: Written Originally in Dutch (…) and Now Rendred into English by Capt. Roger Manley, London 1671, p. 125. Ayutthaya was the capital of a kingdom of the same name from 1351 to 1767 in what is now Thailand.³⁰³⁰Kasetsiri in K.G. Ooi (ed.), Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia, from Angkor Wat to East Timor, I, Santa Barbara 2004, pp. 192-94. The VOC first established diplomatic ties with the city, which they called Judea, in 1604, and opened an office there in 1608, which continued functioning with a few interruptions until 1762. Three years later the country was overrun by Burmese armies, which destroyed Ayutthaya in 1767.³¹³¹Kasetsiri in K.G. Ooi (ed.), Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia, from Angkor Wat to East Timor, I, Santa Barbara 2004, p. 193. The Ayutthaya Historical Park, which contains the ruins of the old city, has been a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1991.

This painting and a very similar watercolour in the Beudeker Atlas are the earliest known depictions of Ayutthaya, and are undoubtedly based on the same model.³²³²Beudeker Atlas, The Hague, National Archives of the Netherlands; illustrated in M. Gosselink, Land in zicht: Vingboons tekent de wereld van de 17de eeuw, exh. cat. Rotterdam (Kunsthal) 2007, p. 132. However, they differ on two points. The Rijksmuseum scene is a bird’s-eye view while the watercolour is a map with the buildings shown in vertical elevation. In addition, figures and boats have been added to the present picture. Zandvliet believed that the painting is based on the watercolour, but that is impossible to prove.³³³³K. Zandvliet, ‘Ayutthaya Seen through Dutch Eyes in the Seventeenth Century’, in D. na Pombejra et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Crossroads of Thai and Dutch History’, Leiden, National Museum of Ethnology, 9-11 September 2004, Bangkok 2007, pp. 101-20, esp. pp. 116-17. There is a print after the painting in J.J. Struys and F.J. van der Heiden, Drie aanmerkelyke en seer rampspoedige reizen, door Italien, Griekenland, Lyfland, Moscovien, Tartaryen, Meden, Persien, Oostindien, Japan, en verscheiden andere gewesten, Haarlem 1742, p. 28; illustrated in the Atlas of Mutual Heritage (published online), while there is a print after the watercolour in F. Valentijn, Oud en Nieuw Oost Indiën, vervattende een naauwkeurige en uitvoerige verhandelinge van Nederlands mogentheyd in die gewesten, III.2, Dordrecht/Amsterdam 1726, p. 60; see F.W.H. Hollstein et al., Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Engravings and Woodcuts ca. 1450-1700, XXXVII, Roosendaal 1991, p. 63, no. 13; illustrated in the Atlas of Mutual Heritage (published online). It is not known who made the model or to when it should be dated.³⁴³⁴M. Gosselink, Land in zicht: Vingboons tekent de wereld van de 17de eeuw, exh. cat. Rotterdam (Kunsthal) 2007, p. 132, believes that it could be from the early seventeenth century. Zandvliet suggested that the original sketch was executed by Joost Schouten before 1635, when the VOC built a new office,³⁵³⁵K. Zandvliet, ‘Ayutthaya Seen through Dutch Eyes in the Seventeenth Century’, in D. na Pombejra et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Crossroads of Thai and Dutch History’, Leiden, National Museum of Ethnology, 9-11 September 2004, Bangkok 2007, pp. 101-20, esp. pp. 116-17. for neither the painting nor the watercolour shows the large parts of the city outside the walls, which is also where the VOC post was.³⁶³⁶The office was on the Chao Phraya river south-east of the city, on the unbuilt area of land at the bottom right in the painting. Excavations have exposed some of the foundations of the complex; see A. Sihamat, ‘Excavation of the Dutch United East India Company (V.O.C.) Historic Site at Ayutthaya’, in D. na Pombejra et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Crossroads of Thai and Dutch History’, Leiden, National Museum of Ethnology, 9-11 September 2004, Bangkok 2007, pp. 401-17. However, as Zandvliet himself said, those parts could have been omitted in order to accentuate the grandeur of Ayutthaya,³⁷³⁷K. Zandvliet, ‘Ayutthaya Seen through Dutch Eyes in the Seventeenth Century’, in D. na Pombejra et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Crossroads of Thai and Dutch History’, Leiden, National Museum of Ethnology, 9-11 September 2004, Bangkok 2007, pp. 101-20, esp. pp. 116-17. and in that the painting succeeds brilliantly, for it gives the impression of an extraordinarily rich city with countless wats (temples) rising high above the houses, each one guarded by two or more chedis (Buddhist stupas) with gilt tops. The marked emphasis on the monumental temples gives the scene the look of an early modern view of classical Rome.³⁸³⁸As, for example, in the prints by Pirro Ligorio and Étienne Dupérac; see C. Huelsen, Saggio di bibliografia ragionata delle piante icnografiche e prospettiche di Roma dal 1551 al 1748, Florence 1933, pp. 43-44, 52-54, 58-61. There are various inaccuracies, quite apart from the lack of buildings around Ayutthaya. The distinctive horseshoe shape of the largely walled island has been rather lost, and the hills in the background are sheer fantasy.³⁹³⁹The most detailed early map of Ayutthaya is in the manuscripts of Engelbert Kaempfer, who visited it in 1690; see B.J. Terwiel, ‘The Drawings of VOC Chief Surgeon Engelbert Kaempfer and the History of Siam’, in D. na Pombejra et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Crossroads of Thai and Dutch History’, Leiden, National Museum of Ethnology, 9-11 September 2004, Bangkok 2007, pp. 233-60.

Although it is not known when it was executed, it was almost certainly a sketch made on the spot that was the basis for the painting. Its inclusion in the series for East India House, the VOC headquarters in Amsterdam, may have had something to do with the company’s plans for its Thai office. From the outset there had been quite a few clashes between the Dutch, the local rulers and merchants from other countries,⁴⁰⁴⁰B. Ruangsilp, Dutch East India Company Merchants at the Court of Ayutthaya: Dutch Perceptions of the Thai Kingdom c. 1604-1765, Leiden 2007, pp. 35-53. and they came to a head around September 1663. The Dutch left Ayutthaya and imposed a blockade on the Chao Phraya, the principal river of Thailand, at various places, only lifting it in February 1644. A Dutch-Thai trade agreement was signed in August, and the post was repaired in 1665.⁴¹⁴¹B. Ruangsilp, Dutch East IndiaCompany Merchants at the Court of Ayutthaya: Dutch Perceptions of the Thai Kingdom c. 1604-1765, Leiden 2007, p. 21; J.E. Heeres, Corpus diplomaticum Neerlando-Indicum: Verzameling van politieke contracten en verdere verdragen door de Nederlanders in het Oosten gesloten, van privilegebrieven, aan hen verleend, enz., II: 1650-1675, The Hague 1931, pp. 280-85.

Erlend de Groot [publication date 2026]

See Key to abbreviations, Rijksmuseum painting catalogues and Acknowledgements

For the present painting (SK-A-4477) and six other Asian views (SK-A-4471 to 4476)
K. Zandvliet (ed.), The Dutch Encounter with Asia 1600-1950, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2002-03, pp. 167-70

For the present painting (SK-A-4477) and six other Asian views (SK-A-4471 to 4476)
1903, p. 10, nos. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 (as The Dutch Settlement on Gunung Lawak near Martapura, Borneo), 89, 90; 1934, p. 9, nos. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 (as The Dutch Settlement on Gunung Lawak near Martapura, Borneo), 89, 90; 1976, p. 664, nos. A 4471, A 4472, A 4473, A 4474, A 4475 (as View of the Dutch Settlement on Gunung Lawak near Martapura, Borneo), A 4476, A 4477; 1992, p. 102, no. A 4475

Erlend de Groot, 2026, 'workshop of Johannes Vingboons, View of Ayutthaya, the Former Capital of Thailand, c. 1662 - c. 1663', in J. Bikker (ed.), Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/200110535