Пост 152. Вермеер и Дельфтская школа, Часть 3. Живопись в Дельфте с 1600 по 1650 годы, Вальтер Лидтке, 67

209. See Van Ackere I972 for numerous examples.

210. For example, in Gombrich 1972 and Gombrich 1975.

211. See Liedtke 2000, pp. 94-104, where the same argument is presented in

greater detail.

2I2. The quote and these details are taken from Montias I982, p. 252. One would

like to know if Mesch acquired some of Tristram's De Mompers.

213. See the essay by Vander Ploeg and Vermeeren in The Hague I997-98a, p. 59.

2I4. See my discussion of Van Coninxloo's role in New York 1985-86, pp. 282-83

(borrowed by Sutton in Amsterdam, Boston, Philadelphia I987-88, p. 21).

215. See Jansen on landscape painting in Middelburg in Amsterdam I984,

pp. 100-10I (including the work of Christoffel van den Berghe, Maatheus

Molanus, Jacob van Geel, who was active in Middelburg about I6I5-26, and

Johannes Goedaert). On landscape painting in Rotterdam, see De Jager's essay

in Rotterdam I994-95, pp. 95-104 (on Abraham van de Rande, Jacob de

Villeers, Willem Buytewech, Hercules Seghers, Herman Saftleven, and others).

Moses van Uyttenbroeck and his apparent pupil Dirck Dalens, Adriaen van de

Venne, Mathieu Dubus, Karel Dujardin (between I656 and I658 only), and

Melchior d'Hondecoeter (about I659-62) stand among the landscapists of The

Hague, who also included, of course, Esaias van de Velde and Jan van Goyen

after their Haarlem years (see their biographies in The Hague I998-99a).

216. Briels 1997, pp. 53, 58, fig. 65. The painting sold at auction in Cologne (no

date given).

217. Briels 1987, p. 316, fig. 400 (panel on the art market in 1983).

218. On Simon Jordaens and his painter sons Simon the Younger and Hans IV, see

Briels 1997, pp. 345 (biographies and sources), 217, fig. 346. Montias (1982, p. 64)

cites a document that says Jordaens was twenty-eight in 1613, which would

suggest he was born about 1585, not 1589 as suggested by Briels. However,

Montias has Jordaens dead after 1644 (p. 64) and before 1640 (p. 335).

219. The best biographies of Van Geel are those in Dordrecht 1992-93, p. 159,

and Briels 1997, p. 329.

220. See Bol 1982, pp. 105-6, where the picture in Detroit is compared with a

painting by Van Alsloot dated 1610.

221. See ibid., pp. 106-7. The author convincingly overrules Wolfgang Stechow's

idea that Van Geel's trees owe something to Alexander Keirincx. On

Rembrandt's landscape in the Rijksmuseum, see Amsterdam, Boston,

Philadelphia 1987-88, no. 76. In 1644 a Rembrandt landscape sold from the

estate of Boudewijn de Man in Delft (Schneider 1990, p. 6o ).

222. The exoticism of Van Geel's landscapes must have been part of their appeal,

as in the case of Frans Post (whose Brazilian landscapes, however, look less

bizarre). Van Geel's work is liberally illustrated in Amsterdam 1984, Bol

1982, Briels 1987, and Briels 1997. See also the pair of round panels dated to

about 1636 in Dordrecht 1992-93, no. 33.

223. Van den Bundel's dates have been given as "ca. 1575-1656", but Briels (1997,

p. 307) gives documentary evidence for his birth in 1577, his burial on January

12, 1655, and much else.

224. Ibid., pp. 307, 315 (on the sale).

225. See ibid., pp. 307, 364-65.

226. Montias 1982, p. 179. Evidence of young painters who flunked out of the

profession is interesting for problems of connoisseurship.

227. On this panel by d'Hondecoeter, see Amsterdam, Boston, Philadelphia

1987-88, no. 48 (with a different title).

228. Briels (1987, pp. 312-17) offers excellent reproductions of works by Van den

Bundel and Gillis d'Hondecoeter. On pp. 131-32, in paintings illustrated as

figs. 150 (fig. 97 here), 151, Briels has Van den Bundel collaborating with

Hans Jordaens, but this is not convincing.