Adriaen van Utrecht

Banquet Still Life with a Parrot, Dog and Monkey

1644

Inscriptions

  • signature and date, bottom left, on the music score:Addriaen van Utrecht fe 1644

Scientific examination and reports

  • technical report: I. Verslype, RMA, 12 juni 2009

Conservation

  • W. de Ridder, 1999: cleaned, restored and revarnished

Provenance

…; collection Pieter George Westenberg (1791-1873), Haarlem; from whom, fl. 1,200, to Adriaan van der Hoop (1778-1854), Haarlem, through the mediation of the dealer Albertus Brondgeest, 31 May 1842;1Van der Hoop Lijst, p. 31, no. 207: ‘een zeer groodt Schilderij […] door Ad: van Utrecht, geteekend Aº:1664, zijnde een Voorstelling van Vruchten Eetwaren Enz: voor de prys van fl. 1200:- zijnde met transportkosten en 5% Courtage fl. 1,271.55’. by whom bequeathed to the City of Amsterdam with 223 other paintings, 1854;2Van der Hoop Taxatie 1854, p. 5, no. 207: ‘Kapitaal stilleven fl. 900’. on loan to the museum from the City of Amsterdam since 30 June 1885; on loan to the Bonnefantenmuseum, Maastricht, 2004-083Provenance also reconstructed in A. Pollmer-Schmidt, ‘Catalogus van de schilderijen in de verzameling van Adriaan van der Hoop’, in E. Bergvelt et al. (eds.), De Hollandse meesters van een Amsterdamse bankier. De verzameling van Adriaan van der Hoop (1778-1854), exh. cat. Amsterdam (Amsterdams Historisch Museum/Rijksmuseum) 2004-05, pp. 135-195, esp. p. 180, no. 186.

ObjectNumber: SK-C-301

Credit line: On loan from the City of Amsterdam (A. van der Hoop Bequest)

The artist

Biography

Adriaen van Utrecht (Antwerp 1599 - Antwerp 1652/53)

The animal and still-life painter Adriaen van Utrecht was baptized in the Sint-Joriskerk, Antwerp, on 12 January 1599. His father, the ‘portier’ of the Antwerp Huis der Oosterlingen had some social pretension as he was to leave his son a ring bearing his coat of arms (perhaps that of the Van Utrecht family of Holland). Adriaen did not enrol as an apprentice until 1614/15, to the then only recently established master, Herman de Ryt, of whom little is known. Presumably on reaching his maturity he travelled, for the rubric to an engraved portrait by Coenraad Waumans (1619-after 1675), published in Antwerp in his life time, states that he had visited France, Provence, Italy and Germany.4F.W.H. Hollstein et al., Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Engravings and Woodcuts 1450-1700, Amsterdam/Roosendaal 1948-, XLIX, L1, no. 26/1 (from Images de Divers Hommes d’esprit, 1649), later illustrated in C. de Bie, Het gulden cabinet van de edel vrij schilder const, inhoudende den lof vande vermartste schilders, architecte, beldtowers ende plaetsnijders van deze eeuwe, Antwerp s.a. (1662), p. 107. He seems to have returned to Flanders on the news of his father’s death, or imminent death (his father’s will in which Adriaen was named executor, is dated 1 June 1624). On 14 August 1625, he paid his dues on becoming a master in the Antwerp guild of St. Luke. Nothing is known of his early activity abroad.

By July of 1627 a still life by him had already been despatched to Paris for sale;5E. Duverger, Fontes historiae Artis Neerlandicae Bronnen voor de Kunstgeschiedenis van de Nederlanden: Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Antwerpse kunstinventarissen uit de zeventiende eeuw, 13 vols., Brussels 1984-2004, III, p. 53. but his earliest extant painting seems to be of 1629.6B. Schnackenburg, Gesamtkatalog Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister Kassel, 2 vols., Kassel 1996, I, p. 300, no. GK157; Von Wurzbach states that there was a picture of 1627 in Rotterdam, in A. von Wurzbach, Niederländisches Künstler-Lexikon, 3 vols., Leipzig/Vienna 1906-11, II, p. 728; this is not traceable in the Museum Boijmans van Beuningen. Between 1626/27 and 1647/48, he took on nine apprentices; the timing of their intake suggests he could accommodate about two at a time. Adriaen’s oeuvre, of which Greindl lists 57 signed and 44 unsigned works, consisted of fruit, flowers and vanitas still lifes, garlands, larder and pronk still lifes and gatherings of chiefly domestic fowl (farmyard scenes).7E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 (ed. princ. 1956), pp. 385-86. Among his patrons, he could count Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange (1584-1647),8Unger prints two letters from the artist to Constantijn Huygens of 1646 and 1648, in J.H.W. Unger, ‘Brieven van eenige schilders aan Constantijn Huygens’, Oud Holland 9 (1891), pp. 187-206, esp. pp. 198-200. In the first he states that he had worked for the Earl of Arundel while discussing the price he should ask for the work he had done for the Prince. In the second he requests payment for further work pleading that he had to support ten children after illness. the Archduke Leopold Wilhelm (1614-1662),9S. Ferino-Pagden et al., Die Gemäldegalerie des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien: Verzeichnis der Gemälde, Vienna 1991, p. 125, no. 7716 and fig. 446; A. Heinrich, Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert (1613/14-1654): Ein Flämische Nachfolger Van Dycks, 2 vols., Turnhout 2003, nos. 63, 64; E. Duverger, Fontes historiae Artis Neerlandicae Bronnen voor de Kunstgeschiedenis van de Nederlanden: Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Antwerpse kunstinventarissen uit de zeventiende eeuw, 13 vols., Brussels 1984-2004, VI, p. 445. and, according to the rubric beneath Waumans’s print, the emperor and the king of Spain. Among his collaborators were Jacques Jordaens I (1593-1678),10H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, no. 3039. Erasmus Quellinus II (1607-1678),11 J.-P. de Bruyn, Erasmus II Quellinus, 1607-1678. De schilderijen met catalogue raisonné, Freren 1988, nos. 66, 67, 68b, 71, for attributed works. Theodoor Rombouts (1597-1637),12N. Gritsay and N. Babina, State Hermitage Museum Catalogue: Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Flemish Painting, St Petersburg 2008, p. 213, no. 288. and Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert (1613/14-1654).13A. Heinrich, Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert (1613/14-1654): Ein Flämische Nachfolger Van Dycks, 2 vols., Turnhout 2003, nos. 46, 47.

He married, on 5 September 1627, Constantia, the daughter of the artist Guilliam van Nieulandt II (1584-1635), with whom he had thirteen children. Godparents included his brother-in-law Simon de Vos (1603-1676), Gerard Seghers (1591-1651), Jacob Moermans (1602-1653) and Frans Ykens (1601-1692/93). From 1638 he lived on the Meir, but he seems to have had money problems from 1647, perhaps brought on by illness, and moved to the Vlemingsveld in 1648. He was still working in 1652;14Photographs of two farmyard scenes of 1652 (with Terry-Engel, London, 1970, and offered for sale, London (Christie’s), 7 July 1995, no. 4) are in the Witt Library, London, along with a still life of 1652 (with Heim-Girac, Paris, 1956). his last will was dated 5 October of that year. His date of death before 17 September 1653 and his place of burial are not known. His widow died in debt in 1656/57.

REFERENCES
F.J. van den Branden, Geschiedenis der Antwerpsche schilderschool, 3 vols., Antwerp 1883, pp. 1082-85; P. Rombouts and T. van Lerius, De Liggeren en andere historische archieven der Antwerpsche Sint Lucasgilde, ondere zinspreuk: ‘Wt Ionsten Versaemt’, 2 vols., Antwerp/The Hague 1864-76, I-II; E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 [ed. princ. 1956], pp. 91-93

Entry

There is no reason to doubt the attribution of this ambitious still life, which is signed and dated 1644. Painted for the most part with reserves with only a few small pentiments, it is one of Adriaen van Utrecht’s few extant pronk still lifes.

Chong and Kloek believe that Frans Snijders (1579-1657) was the main influence in the conception of this work.15A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, no. 42. But Snijders does not seem to have developed his own speciality of the large still life into a fully blown pronk variation of it. Rather a two-way exchange between Van Utrecht and Jan Davidsz de Heem (1606-1684) seems to have been a likely course, beginning with the former’s 1636 Still Life with Precious Metalwork in Brussels.16H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, p. 300, inv. no. 4731; influential too may have been Van Utrecht’s Still Life of Fruit and Precious Objects of 1638; E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 (ed. princ. 1956), p. 90, fig. 54 and p. 91. Segal17S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 25. has suggested that this picture influenced De Heem’s development of the pronk still life in his two paintings of 164018Private collection; S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, fig. 9. and 1642,19Private collection; S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, no. 7. and the latter, in particular, may have been in turn Van Utrecht’s point of departure in formulating the Rijksmuseum picture.20Meijer states that the Amsterdam picture, which ‘probably shows a corner in a hall of a wealthy palace’, is ‘strongly related to de Heem’s pronk stilleven’, see A. van der Willigen and F.G. Meijer, A Dictionary of Dutch and Flemish Still-Life Painters Working in Oils, 1525-1725, Leiden 2003, p. 302. Apart from the shells in the right foreground and the distant landscape view, there are obvious points of contact between the two works, not only in detail but also in the composition as a whole. From the earlier painting (1640), Van Utrecht would have absorbed the position and angle of the pie and spoon on the table and the wine cooler in the bottom right foreground. The first element was a favourite of Haarlem artists such as Pieter Claesz (c. 1597/98-1660),21Such opened pies seem to make a first appearance in Pieter Claesz’s work round 1625, M. Brunner-Bulst, Pieter Claesz.: der Hauptmeister der Haarlemer Stillebens im 17. Jahrhundert: kritischer Oeuvrekatalog, Lingen 2004, no. 20. and may have been introduced to Antwerp by De Heem.

In fact, Van Utrecht would have found the copper basin or wine cooler in Snijders’s work too, for it features fairly frequently in his larder still lifes, as for instance in the Mauritshuis picture of the early 1620s.22H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 65; B.P.J. Broos, Intimacies and Intrigues: History Painting in the Mauritshuis, Ghent/The Hague 1993, p. 137, no. 794. Monkeys too had been introduced into such scenes early by Snijders (following an Antwerp tradition), as for instance, in the painting on the New York art market in 1962.23H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 176, where dated c. 1616-20; other still lifes with monkeys she dates to the 1630s, her nos. 178-184.

Chong and Kloek believe the lobster in the Van Utrecht is disproportionately large; this may have resulted from an influential formula established by Snijders. Whether he attached a symbolic meaning to such proportions as shown in the Carpentras picture, as Robels believes, is open to debate;24H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 10. but even in Snijders’s Larder Still Life in the Rijksmuseum (SK-A-379) the lobster is almost as long as the boar’s head above. They also comment on the ‘towering’ flute glass, but this too may have been an accepted formula, for such a glass is depicted by De Heem in his pronk still life of 1642. The same tendency is evident in the parrot stand, now taller than that in Van Utrecht’s Still life with Precious Metalwork of 1636, and dwarfing the modest stands popularized by Jan Brueghel I (1568-1625).25As in the Prado Allegory of Hearing, K. Ertz, Jan Brueghel der Ältere (1568-1625): Die Gemälde mit kritischem Oeuvrekatalog, Cologne 1979, p. 351, fig. 430; M. Díaz Padrón, Museo del Prado: Catálogo de pinturas, 1: Escuela flamenca siglo XVII, 2 vols., Madrid 1975, I, pp. 43-44, no. 1395.

The musical instruments, placed in the bottom left as in the De Heem, are a violin, lute (placed face down as in the 1642 De Heem), guitar and flute, below which the mouthpiece of a wind instrument protrudes. The musical score has not been identified.26Inscribed on the left-hand page of the music score: BASSVS; beneath are music notations and a vocal part, headed by a decorated capital: ‘P’, and followed by smaller capitals: ‘O’ …. ‘D’ only legible, but for the rest intentionally illegible; on the right-hand page: BASSVS with music notations and an illegible vocal part.

The monkey is an African guenon, whose pose Van Utrecht repeated on other occasions,27In the pictures of: 1646, anonymous sale, London (Sotheby), 9 July 1999, no. 364; 1647, collection Lord Lee (photograph in the Witt Library); 1650, Jamart sale, Brussels (Fievez), 11-12 December 1922, no. 14 (photograph in the Witt Library); and collection F. B. Greenstreet, 1920 (photograph in the Witt Library). suggesting that he worked from the same template. In the right corner before the wine cooler is a dog, clipped lion-like, which Chong and Kloek correctly named a Maltese terrier.28A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, under no. 42. Aldrovandi called this ancient and favourite breed of lapdog Canis Melitensis.29U. Aldrovandi, Ulyssis Aldrovandi patricii Bononiensis De quadrupedib.’ digitatis viviparis libri tres, et de quadrupedib’ digitatis oviparis libri duo, Bologna 1637, pp. 540, 542. Also then known as a bichon maltais, it was popular (as elsewhere) in the Spanish Netherlands, and was depicted, for instance, by Jan Brueghel I (1568-1625) in his joint painting with Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) of The Garden of Eden (Mauritshuis), by David Teniers II (1610-1690) in his early Five Senses (Brussels) and Jacques Jordaens (1593-1678) in his Double Portrait of Govert van Surpele (?) and his Wife of circa 1636 (National Gallery, London).30H. Buvelot, Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis: A Summary Catalogue, The Hague 2004, p. 83, no. 253; H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, p. 289, no. 1257; The National Gallery Complete Illustrated Catalogue, compiled by C. Baker and T. Henry, London 2001, p. 360, no. 6293. For a full survey see V. Leitch, The Maltese Dog, Riverdale 1953, p. 23 and pp. 358ff. Van Utrecht also depicted it in his 1647 pronk still life at Dresden.31H. Marx et al., Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister Dresden: Illustrierte Katalog in zwei Bänden, I: Die Ausgestellten Werke, II: Illustriertes Gesamtverzeichnis, 2 vols., Dresden (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen), Cologne 2005-06, II, p. 557, no. 1208.

On the chair is an elaborately chased silver-gilt ewer and basin; the same two objects seen from different angles seem to appear in the foreground of Van Utrecht’s still life of 1636 in Brussels. No similar pieces have been identified, but they can be compared with the ewer and basin of 1559 in the British Museum, which was made in Antwerp.32J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, nos. 587, 588. Beyond the sweetmeat pie is an ewer of a shell mounted in silver-gilt. The shell is probably a Pink Conch (Strombas gigas), one is prominently displayed in De Heem’s 1642 pronk still life.33S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 136 under no. 7. The ewer, different from the usually favoured nautilus cup, is unusual, and may be compared with the Augsburg, late sixteenth-century, mounted shell ewer by Elias (d. 1572) or Cornelis (d. 1575) Grosz in the Kunsthistorisches Museum.34J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, no. 467. Beyond, by the ham on a plate is an embossed silver-gilt standing cup, a Nuremberg speciality since the early sixteenth century, which returned to fashion in the ‘neo-Gothic period’ from the end of the century until the 1630s.35C. Hernmarck, The Art of the European Silversmith 1430-1830, 2 vols., London/New York 1977, pp. 89-91 and p. 109; a slightly different account is given by Segal in S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 138, under no. 7; see also J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, nos. 482, 487, who states that the form derived from the late Gothic Columbine cup. One is prominently displayed in Clara Peeters’s still life of 1611 in the Prado.36P. Hibbs Decoteau, Clara Peeters 1594-ca. 1640 and the Development of Still-Life Painting in Northern Europe, Lingen 1992, p. 17, ill. 4; M. Díaz Padrón, Museo del Prado: Catálogo de pinturas, 1: Escuela flamenca siglo XVII, 2 vols., Madrid 1975, I, p. 210, no. 1620; Peeters depicted another a year later in the picture at Karlsruhe (illustrated in P. Hibbs Decoteau, Clara Peeters 1594-ca. 1640 and the Development of Still-Life Painting in Northern Europe, Lingen 1992, p. 112, pl. II); J. Lauts (ed.), Katalog alte Meister bis 1800, Karlsruhe (Staatliche Kunsthalle) 1966, p. 236, no. 222. The lobster rests on a klapmuts and the fraises du bois are in a bowl both probably of Kraak porcelain manufacture of the Emperor Wanli period or later.37The decoration of the klapmuts cannot be properly made out; the bowl seems to fall into category II of M. Rinaldi, Kraak Porcelain: A Moment in the History of Trade, London 1989, p. 138, datable from c. 1585-1645; the design on the underside seems similar to that in her Egret mark category, her pl. 266, showing an orchid, which she dates c. 1595-1600. The fruit depicted consists of plums, lemons, grapes, peaches, mulberries, cherries and red and white currants.

Brakensiek believes that in this pronk still life Van Utrecht makes allusion to the Five Senses: the parrot referring to sight and touch, the monkey to taste, the dog to smell end the musical instruments to hearing.38Brakensiek in C. Nitze-Ertz et al. (eds.), Das Flämische Stillleben 1550-1680, exh. cat. Vienna (Kunsthistorisches Museum)/Essen (Villa Hügel) 2002, no. 85; he retained the title ‘Festive Meal’, with which the picture had been christened in the Amsterdam/Cleveland 1999 exhibition, see A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, no. 42.

Gregory Martin, 2022

Literature

E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 [ed. princ. 1956], p. 384, no. 1; E. Bergvelt et al. (eds.), De Hollandse meesters van een Amsterdamse bankier. De verzameling van Adriaan van der Hoop (1778-1854), exh. cat. Amsterdam (Amsterdams Historisch Museum/Rijksmuseum) 2004-05, no. 186

Collection catalogues

1891, p. 173, no. 173; 1903, p. 264, no. 2337; 1934, pp. 283-84, no. 2357; 1976, p. 551, no. C 301

Citation

G. Martin, 2022, 'Adriaen van Utrecht, Banquet Still Life with a Parrot, Dog and Monkey, 1644', in Flemish Paintings in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.10686

(accessed 9 May 2025 18:36:21).

Footnotes

  • 1Van der Hoop Lijst, p. 31, no. 207: ‘een zeer groodt Schilderij […] door Ad: van Utrecht, geteekend Aº:1664, zijnde een Voorstelling van Vruchten Eetwaren Enz: voor de prys van fl. 1200:- zijnde met transportkosten en 5% Courtage fl. 1,271.55’.
  • 2Van der Hoop Taxatie 1854, p. 5, no. 207: ‘Kapitaal stilleven fl. 900’.
  • 3Provenance also reconstructed in A. Pollmer-Schmidt, ‘Catalogus van de schilderijen in de verzameling van Adriaan van der Hoop’, in E. Bergvelt et al. (eds.), De Hollandse meesters van een Amsterdamse bankier. De verzameling van Adriaan van der Hoop (1778-1854), exh. cat. Amsterdam (Amsterdams Historisch Museum/Rijksmuseum) 2004-05, pp. 135-195, esp. p. 180, no. 186.
  • 4F.W.H. Hollstein et al., Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Engravings and Woodcuts 1450-1700, Amsterdam/Roosendaal 1948-, XLIX, L1, no. 26/1 (from Images de Divers Hommes d’esprit, 1649), later illustrated in C. de Bie, Het gulden cabinet van de edel vrij schilder const, inhoudende den lof vande vermartste schilders, architecte, beldtowers ende plaetsnijders van deze eeuwe, Antwerp s.a. (1662), p. 107.
  • 5E. Duverger, Fontes historiae Artis Neerlandicae Bronnen voor de Kunstgeschiedenis van de Nederlanden: Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Antwerpse kunstinventarissen uit de zeventiende eeuw, 13 vols., Brussels 1984-2004, III, p. 53.
  • 6B. Schnackenburg, Gesamtkatalog Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister Kassel, 2 vols., Kassel 1996, I, p. 300, no. GK157; Von Wurzbach states that there was a picture of 1627 in Rotterdam, in A. von Wurzbach, Niederländisches Künstler-Lexikon, 3 vols., Leipzig/Vienna 1906-11, II, p. 728; this is not traceable in the Museum Boijmans van Beuningen.
  • 7E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 (ed. princ. 1956), pp. 385-86.
  • 8Unger prints two letters from the artist to Constantijn Huygens of 1646 and 1648, in J.H.W. Unger, ‘Brieven van eenige schilders aan Constantijn Huygens’, Oud Holland 9 (1891), pp. 187-206, esp. pp. 198-200. In the first he states that he had worked for the Earl of Arundel while discussing the price he should ask for the work he had done for the Prince. In the second he requests payment for further work pleading that he had to support ten children after illness.
  • 9S. Ferino-Pagden et al., Die Gemäldegalerie des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien: Verzeichnis der Gemälde, Vienna 1991, p. 125, no. 7716 and fig. 446; A. Heinrich, Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert (1613/14-1654): Ein Flämische Nachfolger Van Dycks, 2 vols., Turnhout 2003, nos. 63, 64; E. Duverger, Fontes historiae Artis Neerlandicae Bronnen voor de Kunstgeschiedenis van de Nederlanden: Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Antwerpse kunstinventarissen uit de zeventiende eeuw, 13 vols., Brussels 1984-2004, VI, p. 445.
  • 10H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, no. 3039.
  • 11J.-P. de Bruyn, Erasmus II Quellinus, 1607-1678. De schilderijen met catalogue raisonné, Freren 1988, nos. 66, 67, 68b, 71, for attributed works.
  • 12N. Gritsay and N. Babina, State Hermitage Museum Catalogue: Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Flemish Painting, St Petersburg 2008, p. 213, no. 288.
  • 13A. Heinrich, Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert (1613/14-1654): Ein Flämische Nachfolger Van Dycks, 2 vols., Turnhout 2003, nos. 46, 47.
  • 14Photographs of two farmyard scenes of 1652 (with Terry-Engel, London, 1970, and offered for sale, London (Christie’s), 7 July 1995, no. 4) are in the Witt Library, London, along with a still life of 1652 (with Heim-Girac, Paris, 1956).
  • 15A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, no. 42.
  • 16H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, p. 300, inv. no. 4731; influential too may have been Van Utrecht’s Still Life of Fruit and Precious Objects of 1638; E. Greindl, Les peintres flamands de nature morte au XVIIe siècle, Sterrebeek 1983 (ed. princ. 1956), p. 90, fig. 54 and p. 91.
  • 17S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 25.
  • 18Private collection; S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, fig. 9.
  • 19Private collection; S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, no. 7.
  • 20Meijer states that the Amsterdam picture, which ‘probably shows a corner in a hall of a wealthy palace’, is ‘strongly related to de Heem’s pronk stilleven’, see A. van der Willigen and F.G. Meijer, A Dictionary of Dutch and Flemish Still-Life Painters Working in Oils, 1525-1725, Leiden 2003, p. 302.
  • 21Such opened pies seem to make a first appearance in Pieter Claesz’s work round 1625, M. Brunner-Bulst, Pieter Claesz.: der Hauptmeister der Haarlemer Stillebens im 17. Jahrhundert: kritischer Oeuvrekatalog, Lingen 2004, no. 20.
  • 22H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 65; B.P.J. Broos, Intimacies and Intrigues: History Painting in the Mauritshuis, Ghent/The Hague 1993, p. 137, no. 794.
  • 23H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 176, where dated c. 1616-20; other still lifes with monkeys she dates to the 1630s, her nos. 178-184.
  • 24H. Robels, Frans Snyders, Stilleben- und Tiermaler, 1579-1657, Munich 1989, no. 10.
  • 25As in the Prado Allegory of Hearing, K. Ertz, Jan Brueghel der Ältere (1568-1625): Die Gemälde mit kritischem Oeuvrekatalog, Cologne 1979, p. 351, fig. 430; M. Díaz Padrón, Museo del Prado: Catálogo de pinturas, 1: Escuela flamenca siglo XVII, 2 vols., Madrid 1975, I, pp. 43-44, no. 1395.
  • 26Inscribed on the left-hand page of the music score: BASSVS; beneath are music notations and a vocal part, headed by a decorated capital: ‘P’, and followed by smaller capitals: ‘O’ …. ‘D’ only legible, but for the rest intentionally illegible; on the right-hand page: BASSVS with music notations and an illegible vocal part.
  • 27In the pictures of: 1646, anonymous sale, London (Sotheby), 9 July 1999, no. 364; 1647, collection Lord Lee (photograph in the Witt Library); 1650, Jamart sale, Brussels (Fievez), 11-12 December 1922, no. 14 (photograph in the Witt Library); and collection F. B. Greenstreet, 1920 (photograph in the Witt Library).
  • 28A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, under no. 42.
  • 29U. Aldrovandi, Ulyssis Aldrovandi patricii Bononiensis De quadrupedib.’ digitatis viviparis libri tres, et de quadrupedib’ digitatis oviparis libri duo, Bologna 1637, pp. 540, 542.
  • 30H. Buvelot, Royal Picture Gallery Mauritshuis: A Summary Catalogue, The Hague 2004, p. 83, no. 253; H. Pauwels (ed.), Catalogue inventaire de la peinture ancienne, Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1984, p. 289, no. 1257; The National Gallery Complete Illustrated Catalogue, compiled by C. Baker and T. Henry, London 2001, p. 360, no. 6293. For a full survey see V. Leitch, The Maltese Dog, Riverdale 1953, p. 23 and pp. 358ff.
  • 31H. Marx et al., Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister Dresden: Illustrierte Katalog in zwei Bänden, I: Die Ausgestellten Werke, II: Illustriertes Gesamtverzeichnis, 2 vols., Dresden (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen), Cologne 2005-06, II, p. 557, no. 1208.
  • 32J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, nos. 587, 588.
  • 33S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 136 under no. 7.
  • 34J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, no. 467.
  • 35C. Hernmarck, The Art of the European Silversmith 1430-1830, 2 vols., London/New York 1977, pp. 89-91 and p. 109; a slightly different account is given by Segal in S. Segal, Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring, exh. cat. Utrecht (Centraal Museum)/Braunschweig (Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum) 1991, p. 138, under no. 7; see also J.F. Hayward, Virtuoso Goldsmiths and the Triumph of Mannerism, 1540-1620, London 1976, nos. 482, 487, who states that the form derived from the late Gothic Columbine cup.
  • 36P. Hibbs Decoteau, Clara Peeters 1594-ca. 1640 and the Development of Still-Life Painting in Northern Europe, Lingen 1992, p. 17, ill. 4; M. Díaz Padrón, Museo del Prado: Catálogo de pinturas, 1: Escuela flamenca siglo XVII, 2 vols., Madrid 1975, I, p. 210, no. 1620; Peeters depicted another a year later in the picture at Karlsruhe (illustrated in P. Hibbs Decoteau, Clara Peeters 1594-ca. 1640 and the Development of Still-Life Painting in Northern Europe, Lingen 1992, p. 112, pl. II); J. Lauts (ed.), Katalog alte Meister bis 1800, Karlsruhe (Staatliche Kunsthalle) 1966, p. 236, no. 222.
  • 37The decoration of the klapmuts cannot be properly made out; the bowl seems to fall into category II of M. Rinaldi, Kraak Porcelain: A Moment in the History of Trade, London 1989, p. 138, datable from c. 1585-1645; the design on the underside seems similar to that in her Egret mark category, her pl. 266, showing an orchid, which she dates c. 1595-1600.
  • 38Brakensiek in C. Nitze-Ertz et al. (eds.), Das Flämische Stillleben 1550-1680, exh. cat. Vienna (Kunsthistorisches Museum)/Essen (Villa Hügel) 2002, no. 85; he retained the title ‘Festive Meal’, with which the picture had been christened in the Amsterdam/Cleveland 1999 exhibition, see A. Chong and W. Kloek, Still-Life Paintings from the Netherlands 1550-1720, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum)/Cleveland (The Cleveland Museum of Art) 1999-2000, no. 42.