watermark: three crescents; cf. Heawood, no. 863 (Venice: 1610)

…; ? collection Johan Pieter van den Brande (1707-1758), Middelburg, or his son;¹¹According to dossier J.W. Niemeijer, RMA. by descent to Elbert Carsilius Baron van Pallandt (1898-1964), Haarlem; his widow, Jonkvrouwe Abrahamina Cornelia van Pallandt-Sandberg (1899-1982), Arnhem and Haarlem; sale, Elbert Carsilius Baron van Pallandt, Amsterdam (Sotheby Mak van Waay), 26 September 1972, no. 289, fl. 4,408, to the museum, with the support of the Stichting tot Bevordering van de Belangen van het Rijksmuseum

Object number: RP-T-1972-82

Credit line: Purchased with the support of the Stichting tot Bevordering van de Belangen van het Rijksmuseum

Like inv. no. RP-T-1972-81 – with which it also shares a provenance – this drawing is a ricordo or accurate drawn copy of a De Bray family painting, done on a sheet of old Italian paper (of which there was apparently a stock in the family studio). The model was a painting dated 1658 by Joseph’s slightly older brother, Jan de Bray (c. 1627-1697), as he correctly recorded on a plinth at lower right in the image. The painted prototype twice recently appeared on the art market, in London and in Stockholm.⁵⁵Sale, London (Sotheby’s), 7 December 2017, no. 172; sale, Stockholm (Bukowskis), 3 June 2021, no. 787; J. Giltay, Jan de Braij (1626/1627-1697). Schilder en architect, Zwolle 2017, no. 13 (where the date is given as an illegible fragment ‘1...5...’, whereas in the auction catalogues for both sales, it is fully recorded as ‘1658’.

The actual signature of the author of the copy, and its precise date of execution, is found at lower right, below the image but within the drawn frame.⁶⁶When the drawing entered the museum in 1972, this inscription has been regarded as a dedication; cf. ‘Keuze uit de aanwinsten’, p. 32; however, in the catalogue of the Van Pallandt sale, Amsterdam (Sotheby’s Mak van Waay) 26 September 1972, p. 33, no. 289. it was rightly recorded as by Joseph referring to Jan’s invention. From the date of the copy, 6 February 1658, we can infer that Jan’s painting, also dated 1658, was finished by early February of that year.

The subject, taken from Ovid’s Metamorphoses (2: 708-832), is relatively rare in Dutch art, one other example being a painting by Carel Fabritius (1622-1654) in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (inv. no. 03.1143). Mercury fell in love with Herse, daughter of Cecrops, King of Athens. He asked Herse’s sister Aglauros to let him into his beloved’s chamber, offering gold as a reward. Jealous Aglauros, however, barred the god from entering – the moment depicted by the De Brays. Minutes later, Mercury would raise his caduceus and touch the begrudging sister, turning her into a stone.

The drawn oeuvre of Joseph de Bray consists largely of making drawn copies for the family archive after works by his father Salomon and his brother Jan.⁷⁷On this archive, see J. Giltaij and F. Lammertse, ‘Maintaining a Studio Archive: Drawn Copies by the De Braij Family’, Master Drawings 39 (2001), no. 4, pp. 367-94; and J. Giltaij, Jan de Braij (1626/1627-1697). Schilder en architect, Zwolle 2017, p. 47 and nos. T90-94. For the present ricordo, Joseph, like his elder brother, employed red and black chalk. Before he started drawing, Joseph marked the vanishing point with a dot within a circle, found along the left edge.⁸⁸It was not a pinprick, as stated by Giltaij (ibid., p. 312). He also lightly squared the paper to transfer the motif, now visible only in areas of blank white paper.⁹⁹The painting must have been squared as well, using a material such as charcoal that would have been easily wiped off after the process; cf. K. Kirsch, ‘Übertragungsverfahren und technische Hilfsmittel’, in I. Sandner (ed.), Die Unterzeichnung auf dem Malgrund: Graphische Mittel und Übertragungsverfahren im 15.-17. Jahrhundert, Munich 2004 (Kölner Beiträge zur Restaurierung und Konservierung von Kunst- und Kulturgut, vol. 11), p. 203. Stylistically, Joseph followed Jan’s lead as well, but his hatching and his definition of form are occasionally less well defined, as is revealed by the plump right hand of Aglauros, which appears almost like a paw.

Annemarie Stefes, 2019

‘Keuze uit aanwinsten’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 21 (1973), pp. 32, 43 (fig. 20); P. Schatborn, Dutch Figure Drawings from the Seventeenth Century, exh. cat. Amsterdam (Rijksprentenkabinet)/Washington (DC) (National Gallery of Art) 1981-82, p. 133; J. Giltaij and F. Lammertse, ‘Maintaining a Studio Archive: Drawn Copies by the De Braij Family’, Master Drawings 39 (2001), pp. 384-85 (fig. 22), 393-94 (nn. 21 and 36); F.C. Meijer, ‘Joseph and Dirck de Bray: Painters of Still-lives’, in P. Biesboer et al., Painting Family: The De Brays, Master Painters of 17th-century Holland, exh. cat. Haarlem (Frans Hals Museum)/London (Dulwich Picture Gallery) 2008, pp. 29-30 (fig. 25), 136 (n. 8; with wrong inv. no.); J. Giltaij, Jan de Braij (1626/1627-1697). Schilder en architect, Zwolle 2017, pp. 47-48, 87, 312, no. T90, and p. 48 (fig. 5)

A. Stefes, 2019, 'Joseph de Bray, _, Haarlem, 1658-02-06', in J. Turner (ed.), _Dutch Drawings of the Seventeenth Century in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/200120132