Aelbert Cuyp DPG144, DPG315, DPG245
Circle of Aelbert Cuyp
DPG144 – Cattle near the Old Maas, with Dordrecht in the Distance
17th century; mahogany panel, 76.2 x 106.4 cm
Inscribed, bottom right: A. cuyp
PROVENANCE
?;1 Bourgeois Bequest, 1811; Britton 1813, p. 18, no. 168 (‘Closet in Upper Room West / no. 2, Cows, a woman milking – canal – P[anel]. Cuyp’; 3'3" x 4'6").
REFERENCES
Cat. 1817, p. 4, no. 30 (‘FIRST ROOM – West Side; A Landscape, with Cows and a Woman milking; Cuyp’); Haydon 1817, p. 372, no. 30; Cat. 1820, p. 4, no. 30; Patmore 1824b, p. 21, no. 48 (Cuyp);2 Cat. 1830, p. 12, no. 243 (Cuyp); Jameson 1842, ii, pp. 482–3, no. 243 (Cuyp); Denning 1858, no. 243;3 not in Denning 1859; Sparkes 1876, p. 49, no. 243 (Cuyp); Richter & Sparkes 1880, p. 47, no. 243 (Cuyp);4 Richter & Sparkes 1892 and 1905, p. 37, no. 144; HdG, ii, 1908, p. 65, no. 201 (Smith 73; Engl. edn 1909, pp. 67–8); Cook 1914, p. 86, no. 144; Cook 1926, p. 81, no. 144; Cat. 1953, p. 17 (Cuyp); Reiss 1975, pp. 117, 206, no. 80 (Cuyp; late 1640s); Murray 1980a, p. 48 (Cuyp); Murray 1980b, p. 12; Vogel 1992, p. 228, note 9; Chong 1992, C 58a;5 Chong 1993, p. 467, C 59a (more or less identical in composition to C 59 = Related works, no. 2a);6 Beresford 1998, p. 84 (after Cuyp); Haverkamp-Begemann 1999, pp. 196–7, under no. 60; Sluijter 2000, pp. 106–7, 135 (note 10), 136 (note 23), fig. 149 (Cuyp); Jonker & Bergvelt 2016, p. 64, 66; RKD, no. 290749: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/290749 (Aug. 28, 2018)
EXHIBITION
London/Leeds 1947–53, n.p., no. 6.
TECHNICAL NOTES
Three-member mahogany panel with horizontal joins. The panel is fitted with a cradle which is detached at the bottom. The panel has been thinned, exposing old worm holes on the back. The panel members are not well joined. On the front there are two indented scores in the sky to the left of the church and windmill. The foreground has suffered from over-cleaning in the past, resulting in some blanching and there are heavy dark retouchings in the hill and around the right-hand cow.Previous recorded treatment: 1871, restored, varnished and frame regilded; 1911, cleaned and restored, Holder.
RELATED WORKS
Paintings
1a) After Aelbert Cuyp, Milkmaid on the Banks of the Oude Maas, inscribed A. Cuyp, panel, 78 x 105 cm. BvB, Rotterdam, 2491 (OK) [1].7
1b) Aelbert Cuyp, A Distant View of Dordrecht, with a Milkmaid and Four Cows, and Other Figures (‘The Large Dort’), signed, c. 1650, canvas, 157.5 x 197 cm. NG, London, NG961; Chong 114.8
1c) Aelbert Cuyp, Milking Scene near a River, signed, c. 1646, panel, 48.3 x 74.6 cm. Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe, 2781; Chong 109.9
1d) Aelbert Cuyp, Milking Scene with a Haycart in the Background, signed, canvas, 106 x 174 cm. Hermitage, St Petersburg, 828; Chong 84.10
1e) ?Aelbert Cuyp, Herdsman and a Milkmaid before the Ruins of the [?] Rijnsburg Abbey, signed, c. 1655, canvas, 101.6 x 134.6 cm. Detroit Institute of Arts, 89.33; Chong C 47.11
1f. (Studio of) Aelbert Cuyp, Milking Cows, signed, panel, 50.5 x 66.9 cm. National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, 49; Chong 66.12
1g) Aelbert Cuyp, Milking Scene near a River, signed, canvas, 106 x 138.4 cm. Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena, F.70.7.P; Chong 112.13
1h) Aelbert Cuyp, Milking Scene along a River, c. 1650–55, canvas, 93.3 x 119.4 cm. Richard Green Gallery, London, 2012; Chong C 75.14
Drawings
2a) Aelbert Cuyp, View of the Groote Kerk in Dordrecht from the River Maas, black chalk and moistened black chalk, grey wash, greenish yellow and greyish green wash, and touches of brown chalk, 182 x 368 mm. MMA, New York, Lehman Collection, 1975.1.768 [2].15
2b) Copy after Aelbert Cuyp, Study of Milk Cans, Cows and a Milkmaid, black chalk and grey wash, framing line in black chalk, 142 x 190 mm. Pierpont Morgan Library, Dept of Drawings and Prints, New York, I, 123 [3].16
2c) Aelbert Cuyp, Milkmaid, c. 1642–6, black chalk, graphite and grey wash, 4¾ x 5 13/16 in. [c. 121 x 148 mm]. J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 86.GG.672 [4].17
Copies
3a) 18th- or 19th-century copy of DPG144, canvas transferred to panel, 87.6 x 118.8 cm. Present whereabouts unknown (formerly Timken Art Gallery, San Diego, Calif.; sold Christie’s, New York, 11 Jan. 1979, lot 182, as A. van Strij); Chong C 59b.18
3b) Close to C 59, with different plants at lower left, 68 x 91.5 cm. Present whereabouts unknown (sale Brussels, 6 Dec. 1938 (lot 22), repr.; R. W. P. de Vries sale, Amsterdam, 14 May 1935 (lot 34) repr.; sale Brussels, 5 May 1934 (lot 51) repr.; Chong C 59c.19
3c) Copy: panel, 70 x 103 cm. Hans Bieder, Basel (dealer), 1978 (formerly A. G. Lucerne collection, 1934; Goudstikker, 1929); Chong C 59d.20
3d) Copy: panel, 72.5 x 104 cm. Museo Lázaro Galdiano, Madrid, 3556 (photo Frick, anon. Dutch); Chong C 59e.21
Several examples of this composition are known, according to Chong the best of them in Rotterdam (Related works, no. 1a) [1], which is virtually identical to the Dulwich picture except for the omission of the heron on the left. The Rotterdam picture may be ‘a record [of] an original’ (Chong), but it is in such a damaged state that it is impossible to be certain. However we think, looking at the digital images, that the Dulwich picture seems the better of the two. DPG144 seems to be a copy, as evidenced by the broadly painted cows. The paintings probably reflect a lost original by Cuyp of shortly after 1645, when the artist painted several scenes of milking, such as The Large Dort of c. 1650 (Related works, no. 1b) and the Milking Scene near a River (Related works, no. 1c), all of which contain similar milk jugs, of which a drawing after Cuyp exists (Related works no. 2b) [3]. For the view of the city of Dordrecht on the left there is a preparatory drawing (Related works, no. 2a) [2]. For the milkmaids in many other Cuyp paintings a drawing can also be signalled (Related works, no. 2c) [4]; there she is facing the viewer, with her legs and body turned to the left (as, for example, in Related works, nos 1d–1f, 1h); in other cases her legs are to the right and we cannot see her face, as in the present work (and for example in Related works, nos 1b, 1c and 1g). On the river we see an inland barge with a spritsail.22
DPG144
circle of Aelbert Cuyp
Cattle near the (Old) Maas, with Dordrecht in the distance, 1635-1700
Dulwich (Southwark), Dulwich Picture Gallery, inv./cat.nr. DPG144
1
after Aelbert Cuyp
Milkmaid on the banks of the Oude Maas, 1645-1700
Rotterdam, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, inv./cat.nr. 2491 (OK)
2
Aelbert Cuyp
View of the Groote Kerk in Dordrecht from the River (Old) Maas, ca. 1647-1648
New York City, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv./cat.nr. 1975.1.768
3
after Aelbert Cuyp
Study of milk cans, cows and a milkmaid, after c. 1635
New York City, The Morgan Library & Museum, inv./cat.nr. I, 123
4
Aelbert Cuyp
Milkmaid, c. 1642-1646
Los Angeles (California), Malibu (California), J. Paul Getty Museum, inv./cat.nr. 86.GG.672
Style of Aelbert Cuyp, 17th/18th century
DPG315 –View on the Maas
Late 17th–18th century; canvas, 63.5 x 81 cm
Inscribed, bottom left: A. Cuyp (worn)
PROVENANCE
?Phillips, London, 20 March 1807 (Lugt 7202), lot 118 (‘Cuyp – A View on the Banks of a Canal, with Cattle and Figures, with a View of Dort in the distance, painted with a spirited pencil, in a rich brilliant tone of colour’), probably bt Bourgeois for £93 9s.;23 Bourgeois Bequest, 1811; Britton 1813, p. 9, no. 69 (‘Library Pictures by Cuyp / no. 6, Landse. Village church – figures cattle water C[anvas]. Cuyp’; 3'1" x 3'7").
REFERENCES
Cat. 1817, p. 5, no. 48 (‘FIRST ROOM – North Side; A View near Dort; Albert Cuyp’); Haydon 1817, p. 374, no. 48;24 Cat. 1820, p. 5, no. 48; Patmore 1824b, pp. 15–16, no. 65;25 Cat.1830, p. 10, no. 184 (Cuyp); Jameson 1842, ii, p. 472, no. 184 (Cuyp); Denning 1858, no. 184 (Cuyp); Denning 1859, no. 184 (after Cuyp); Sparkes 1876, p. 48, no. 184; Richter & Sparkes 1880, p. 47, no. 184 (Cuyp; ‘Only remarkable for the delicate harmony of the background’); Richter & Sparkes 1892 and 1905, p. 84, no. 315; HdG, ii, 1908, p. 107, no. 371 (Engl. edn 1909, p. 112); Cook 1914, p. 191, no. 315; Cook 1926, p. 178, no. 315; Cat. 1953, p. 17; Reiss 1975, p. 207; Murray 1980a, p. 301 (after Cuyp); not in Chong 1992 or 1993; Beresford 1998, p. 85 (Manner of Cuyp); Jonker & Bergvelt 2016, pp. 65–6 (style of Cuyp); RKD, no. 291577: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/291577 (Sept. 18, 2018).
TECHNICAL NOTES
Fine plain-weave linen canvas. Glue paste lined. There is an unrestored tear in the cows at the left. The paint surface has some wear and there are numerous areas of restoration. The signature is a later addition. Previous recorded treatment: 1874, surface dirt removed, varnished; 1911, lined, new stretcher provided, Holder; 1952–5, some varnish removed, Dr Hell.
The scene is a riverbank, with in the distance, on the far bank, the town of Dordrecht, dominated by the Grote Kerk. The sky is bright, with clouds to the right; on the river are barges with spritsails.26 The picture seems to be a late 17th- or 18th-century work in the style of Cuyp, and is an attempt at one of the artist’s favourite themes, his home city of Dordrecht on the banks of the Old Maas. Given that Desenfans and Bourgeois’ collection contained so many superb paintings by Cuyp, it is surprising that Bourgeois should have purchased it, but given the state of knowledge of the artist at the time it is perhaps understandable: Patmore’s Beauties of the Dulwich Picture Gallery of 1824 describes DPG315 as ‘an early work of the master […] deficient in the elegance and refinement for which [his later works] are frequently so conspicuous’, and this is presumably the view that Bourgeois took.
DPG315
Anonymous 1675-1800 pasticcio after Aelbert Cuyp
View on the (Old) Maas, 1675-1800
Dulwich (Southwark), Dulwich Picture Gallery, inv./cat.nr. DPG315
Manner of Aelbert Cuyp
DPG245 – Cattle near a River
1660–1722; canvas, 92 x 119.4 cm
Inscribed, bottom right: A.cuijp:
PROVENANCE
Richard Hulse sale, Christie’s, 21 March 1806 (Lugt 7045), lot 91 (‘Cattle and Figures on the Banks of a River – a charming Picture of this fascinating Painter, who for truth of Colouring, breadth of Effect, and spirit of execution in these subjects, stands unrivalled’); bt ‘Sir F. B.’ for 225 gns (£236.50); Bourgeois Bequest, 1811; Britton 1813, p. 25, no. 248 (‘Small Drawing Room / no. 1, Landscape, Sheep, Shepherd & Cows – C[anvas]. Cuyp’; 4' x 4'2").27
REFERENCES
Cat. 1817;28 Haydon 1817, p. 376;29 Cat. 1820;30 Patmore 1824b, pp. 17–18, no. 72;31 Hazlitt 1824, pp. 30–31;32 Cat. 1830, p. 6, no. 83 (Cuyp); Smith, v, 1834, pp. 312–13, no. 103;33 Jameson 1842, ii, p. 455, no. 83;34 Clarke 1842, no. 83;35 Hazlitt 1843, p. 24, no. 83;36 Ruskin 1843, pt ii, sec. ii, ch.1 (Of Truth of Tone), pp. 111–12;37 Ruskin 1843, pt. ii, sec. v, ch. 1 (Of Water, as painted by the Ancients), pp. 336–7;38 Ruskin 1846, pt. ii, sec. v, ch. I (Of Water, as painted by the Ancients), p. 336;39 Denning 1858 and 1859, no. 83;40 Sparkes 1876, pp. 45–6, no. 83 (‘This beautiful picture’); Richter & Sparkes 1880, p. 45, no. 83;41 Richter & Sparkes 1892 and 1905, pp. 66–7, no. 245; HdG, ii, 1908, p. 102, no. 350 (Engl. edn 1909, pp. 107–8); Cook 1914, pp. 155–6, no. 245; Cook 1926, pp. 145–6, no. 245; Cat. 1953, p. 17; Murray 1980a, p. 300 (Cuyp); Chong 1993, pp. 506–7, under Calr 6, copy no. i;42 Beresford 1998, pp. 84–5 (Manner of Cuyp); Jonker & Bergvelt 2016, pp. 65–6 (Manner of Cuyp); RKD, no. 287294: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/287294 (April 21, 2018).
TECHNICAL NOTES
Glue paste lined; the original tacking margins are absent except for remnants at the top right edge. Cupped paint craquelure is evident in the foliage. The left part of the sky is slightly abraded. Overall this painting is fairly well preserved, with some old retouching remaining. Previous recorded treatment: 1980, NMM condition report; 1995, minor attention, N. Ryder.
RELATED WORKS
1) Follower of Aelbert Cuyp, Lake Landscape with Shepherdess and Cattle, canvas, 74 x 93 cm. Present whereabouts unknown (Koller West, Koller Auctions, Zurich, 24 March 2010, lot 6414 [5].43
2) Aelbert Cuyp, A Hilly River Landscape with a Horseman talking to a Shepherdess, signed, c. 1655–60, canvas, 135 x 201.5 cm. Chong Calr 6. NG, London, NG53 [6].44
3) Aelbert Cuyp, The Meeting of David and Abigail, canvas, 159 x 209.5 cm. Chong 70. Kunstmuseum, Basel, 904 [7].45
The scene is a bright, sunny day, with a river or lake on whose bank is a young oak tree. For much of the 19th century Cattle near a River was highly praised, Mrs Jameson calling it ‘beautiful’, Denning saying ‘This is a fine picture’, and Richter and Sparkes describing it as ‘Unusually splendid in its harmony’. However Ruskin singled it out for criticism, complaining that ‘the post at the end of the bank casts three or four radiating reflections. This is visibly neither license nor half-science, but pure ignorance.’ Denning cited Ruskin's sentence, but added: ‘True: but they are from the brush of Sir F. Bourgeois, at all events much later than Cuyp.’ This post mentioned by Ruskin and Denning has since been removed. As knowledge of Cuyp has increased in recent decades it has become clear that the picture is an imitation of Cuyp’s style by a contemporary; it is uncertain whether it was originally intended to deceive the viewer, or was merely reacting to a popular style.
A painting by a follower of Cuyp (Related works, no. 1) [5] has much in common with DPG245, but there the shepherdess has a straw hat and there is a sailing ship on the lake to the left. The shepherdess in Cattle near a River is very similar to the one in the much discussed Hilly River Landscape in the National Gallery (Related works, no. 2) [6]. Chong considers that DPG245 is ‘a pastiche, with the shepherdess and landscape’ of that picture. Its condition, according to Denning partly overpainted by Bourgeois, is no help to ascertaining its qualities. Even without the overpainted left part it is weaker than the National Gallery picture. Perhaps it is by Calraet: the elegant horse in the middle distance is certainly within his reach. The shepherdess can also be compared to one of the rather stiff ladies (second from the right) in a Cuyp picture in Basel depicting The Meeting of David and Abigail (Related works, no. 3) [7].
DPG245
manner of Aelbert Cuyp
Cattle near a river
Dulwich (Southwark), Dulwich Picture Gallery, inv./cat.nr. DPG245
5
follower of Aelbert Cuyp
Lake landscape with shepherdess, shepherds and animals, c. 1640-1691
6
Aelbert Cuyp or Abraham van Calraet
Hilly landscape with horseman talking to a shepherdess, 1655-1660
London (England), National Gallery (London), inv./cat.nr. NG53
7
Aelbert Cuyp
The meeting of David and Abigail, who brings him supplies for his men (1 Samuel 25:23). Portrait of the family of Lowijs Jacobsz. Molenschot and his wife Janneken Jansdr. Rokus, after 1652
Basel (Switzerland), Kunstmuseum Basel, inv./cat.nr. 904
Notes
1 According to Murray (notes in DPG144 file) DPG144 was in the Desenfans sales of 11–14 May 1785 (Lugt 3882), lot 68: ‘A capital landscape with cattle and figures’) and 8 April ff. 1786 (Lugt 4022), lot 90: ‘A capital landscape with cattle and figures’. As the dimensions are different, it is not likely that this is the Cuyp that was in the possession of Joseph Franz Anton, Graf von Waldburg-Zeil-Wurzach; his sale, Truchsessian Gallery, London, 14 May ff. 1804 (not in Lugt), lot 378 (‘A. Kuyp – Cows and dairy maid […] on wood, 1'10" h x 3' w’; the materials and dimensions are given in the 1803 descriptive catalogue), see GPID (13 Aug. 2013).
2 ‘He seemed to take a singular pleasure in illustrating the scenery about his native spot, and he has done so in the present instance to a fine effect. […] Nothing can be more exquisitely natural than the effect of this scene, or more worthy of the spectator’s highest admiration; especially when he considers the extreme difficulty that is overcome in producing it. Here are a few common-place objects, such as meet our eye every day; and yet, by the mysterious agency of the medium through which we are made to look upon them, they assume a character of interest and novelty that the most rare and novel objects do not possess when laid before us by a less gifted hand.’
3 ‘The town and cathedral of Dort in the distance. This was Cuyp’s native town (cf: 5) and most of his landscapes are Scenes in the neighbourhood. “He possessed a handsome country seat, at a place called Dordwyck, a short distance from Dort.” Smith after Houbraken.’ About Dortwijk see Paarlberg 2020, pp. 234–5 (fig. 1).
4 ‘The execution of the foreground is less carefully done than usual; the representation of the storm-clouds which gather thickly over the landscape is masterly.’
5 Chong 1992, n.p.: the original is in the BvB, Rotterdam, 2491; DPG144 is ‘More or less identical to the above except for the addition of a heron at left. The cattle here are more broadly painted than in Cuyp’s work, or indeed than those in the Rotterdam version.’
6 ‘The mahogany panel also rules out an attribution to Cuyp.’ It is not clear why Cuyp could not have used mahogany.
7 RKD, no. 291572: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/291572 (Sept. 18, 2018); Giltaij 2000, p. 45 (Aelbert Cuyp); Chong 1993, pp. 467–8, C 59 (‘The Rotterdam painting is the best version of this composition, but it is not convincing as a Cuyp […] The composition may be a record of an original painting by Cuyp’); HdG, ii, 1908, p. 111, no. 384.
8 MacLaren & Brown 1991, i, pp. 91–2; ii, fig. 78; HdG 268e, 368; Reiss 1975, p. 120, no. 83. See also https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/aelbert-cuyp-the-large-dort/*/key-facts (18 Nov. 2012).
9 Voigt 2005, p. 70 (fig.); Chong 1993, p. 349, no. 109; HdG 374; Reiss 1975, p. 76, no. 43.
10 Chong 1993, pp. 327–8, no. 84; HdG 379; Reiss 1975, p. 92, no. 57 (attributed to Aelbert Cuyp).
11 Chong 1993, p. 461, no. C 47.
12 Chong 2002, p. 188, no. C8 (incorrect attribution to Jacob Cuyp); Potterton 1986, pp. 28–9, no. 49, figs 36–7; Chong 1993, pp. 312–13; Reiss 1975, p. 90, no. 55 (studio); HdG 364.
13 Chong 1993, pp. 353–4, no. 112; HdG 367, confused with Cat. C 75.
14 Chong 1993, pp. 472–3, no. C 75; Chong 2012 considers this a ‘real’ Aelbert Cuyp.
15 RKD, no. 291553: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/291553 (Sept. 18, 2018); Haverkamp-Begemann 1999, pp. 195–7, no. 60; previously Sotheby’s, 21 Oct. 1963, lot 57; see also Reiss 1975, p. 117, under no. 80 (ill.); Kloek 2001, pp. 250, 285, no. 82.
16 RKD, no. 291557: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/291557 (Sept. 18, 2018); see also http://corsair.themorgan.org/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=128164 (Sept. 4, 2018); Turner 2006, i, p. 53, ii, fig. 55: probably early 19th century.
17 RKD, no. 291560: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/291560 (Sept. 18, 2018); Kloek 2001, pp. 275, 291, no. 107. See also http://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/186/aelbert-cuyp-a-milkmaid-dutch-about-1642-1646/ (Sept. 4, 2018).
18 Chong 1993, pp. 467–8, no. C 59 b; HdG, ii, 1908, p. 111, no. 385.
19 Chong 1993, p. 468, no. C 59c.
20 Chong 1993, p. 468, no. C 59d.
21 Chong 1993, p. 468, no. C 59e.
22 Notes by Remmelt Daalder sent to Ellinoor Bergvelt, 28 March 2018 and 9 April 2018 (DPG144 file).
23 Letter from Burton Fredericksen to Giles Waterfield, 22 Jan. 1990 (DPG315 file); according to Fredericksen probably bought by Bourgeois for £93 9s. The description could also refer to DPG144, but DPG315 is more likely. Lot 118 is recorded as being bought by Bourgeois in an annotated copy of the catalogue in the V&A.
24 ‘Albert Cuyp. A View of Dort. Landscape, sheep and goats, form a rich fore-ground. The river comes between; while the town on the other side forms a rich and imposing back-ground.’
25 ‘Supposing this to be an early work of the master, it is well worth study and attention, as exhibiting much of the force and truth of general effect which is observable in his later productions; but it is altogether deficient in the elegance and refinement for which they are frequently so conspicuous.’
26 Notes by Remmelt Daalder sent to Ellinoor Bergvelt, 28 March 2018 and 9 April 2018 (DPG315 file).
27 Britton’s inventory is puzzling here, as the height is labelled 4' and the width 4'2", whereas the picture has a landscape format (the same is the case with Weenix DPG47, no. 250 on the same page).
28 It is not clear which of the pictures by Cuyp here is DPG245: both no. 69 and no. 70 give the information ‘FIRST ROOM – East Side; A Landscape, with Sheep, Cattle & Figures, Cuyp’.
29 In Haydon also it is also not clear which description refers to DPG245: no. 69 (‘Albert Cuyp. Ditto [Landscape], with Sheep, Cattle and Figures. Possessing all those beauties of execution, and truth of drawing, colouring and effect, that have so justly placed this master so high in his line of Art’) or no. 70 (‘Ditto’ [Albert Cuyp]. Ditto [Landscape]. Ditto [with Sheep, Cattle and Figures]. On the banks of a large river, or arm of the sea with a vessel sailing in the distance’). However a vessel is not visible in either of these paintings – possibly later removed?
30 As in Cat. 1817, identical descriptions make it impossible to say which was DPG245 (see note 28 above).
31 ‘This is another rich and glowing specimen of his finest manner. […] Nothing can possibly be finer than this water. It is in no degree inferior to some of Claude’s finest specimens of the same kind. It is all glowing and glittering with the sunshine which lies upon it; and the rich unity of effect, resulting from the manner in which the light, the water, and the sky are blended together, and as it were melted into each other, is delicious.’
32 ‘The landscape opposite it (in the same room) by Albert Cuyp, has a richer colouring and a stronger contrast of light and shade, but it has not the tender bloom of a spring morning (so delicate, yet so powerful in its effect) which the other [No. 3 = DPG128] possesses.’
33 ‘2 ft. 10 in. by 3 ft. 7 in. – C[anvas] (about). Collection of Richard Hulse, Esq., 1806. 225 gs. Bought by Sir Francis Bourgeois'.
34 ‘A beautiful picture, bought by Sir F. Bourgeois, from the collection of R. Hulse.’
35 ‘A rich and glowing specimen of his finest manner. […] Nothing can possibly be finer than this water. It is all glowing and glittering with the sunshine which lies upon it, and the rich unity of effect, resulting from the manner in which it were melted into each other, is delicious.’
36 Almost the same description as in Hazlitt 1824 (see note 32 above); only the number is added [83].
37 ‘§19 The perfections of Cuyp in this respect interfered with by numerous solecisms […] And again, in that marked 83, while the figures on the right are walking in the most precious light, and those just beyond them in the distance leave a furlong or two of pure visible sunbeams between us and them; the cows in the centre are entirely deprived, poor things! of both light and air, and have nothing but brown paint to depend upon. And these failing parts, though they often escape the eye when we are near the picture and able to dwell upon what is beautiful in it, yet so injure its whole effect.’
38 ‘§19 Singular mistakes of Cuyp, in casting half-a-dozen reflections from one object. […] In the picture of Cuyp, No. 83, Dulwich Gallery, it is exceedingly difficult to understand under what kind of moral or intellectual delusion the painter was induced to give the post at the end of the bank on the left, its numerous radiating reflections or shadows; for, in the first place, the sun is not apt to cast half-a-dozen shadows at the same time, neither is water usually disposed to reflect one line in six directions; and, in the second place, supposing that in some melancholy state of bewilderment the painter had supposed these shadows to be indicative of radiating light proceeding from the sun, it is difficult to understand how he could have cast the shadow of the ship in the distance in a line, which, if produced, would cut half of the shadows of the post at right angles. This is a slight passage, and one not likely to attract attention; but I do not know any thing more perfectly demonstrative of an artist’s entire ignorance. I hope, however, and think it probable – for Cuyp had looked at nature, and I can scarcely suppose him capable of committing anything so gross as this – that the shadows of the post may be a picture-dealer’s improvement, and that only the one cast by the ship is Cuyp’s.’ NB: on none of the Cuyps or Calraets in DPG is such a post visible now. Clearly there was one at the time of Ruskin and Denning (see the next two notes).
39 ‘§17 Various licenses or errors in water painting of Claude, Cuyp, Vandevelde. […] In the picture of Cuyp, No. 83 in the Dulwich Gallery, the post at the end of the bank casts three or four radiating reflections. This is visibly neither license nor half-science, but pure ignorance.’ NB: on none of the Cuyps or Calraets in DPG is such a post visible now (see the preceding note and the following note).
40 1859: ‘It is a fine picture. Mr. Ruskin criticises this picture in his Modern Painters (Vol: 1. p: 148 and again 335). […] Mr. Ruskin also remarks “The post at the end of the bank casts three or four radiating reflections. This is pure ignorance.” True: but they are from the brush of Sir F. Bourgeois, at all events much later than Cuyp.’
41 ‘Unusually splendid in its harmony, the principal colours being emerald-green and copper-brown; Cuijp’s picture No. 822 in the National Gallery (Peel Collection) is of a similar tone of colour.’ For us the similarity is not at all apparent.
42 Copy no. i is ‘a pastiche, with the shepherdess and landscape’ of the ‘real’ Calraet picture, now in the National Gallery (Related works, no. 2) [6].
43 RKD, no. 289510: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/289510 (July 21, 2020).
44 RKD, no. 221428: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/221428 (July 20, 2020). According to Chong 1993, pp. 505–7, Calr 6, DPG245 is ‘a pastiche, with the shepherdess and landscape’, of what he considers to be a Calraet picture in the National Gallery. However the National Gallery retains the attribution to Cuyp. MacLaren & Brown 1991, i, pp. 87–8, no. 53; ii, fig. 73; see also https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/aelbert-cuyp-a-hilly-landscape-with-figures (Dec. 10, 2017).
45 RKD, no. 2294: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/2294 (Dec. 11, 2017); Chong 1993, pp. 316–17, no. 70; Pastoor 1991, pp. 130–33; Lindemann 1995.