.jpg?w=1)
拍品专文
Unlike academically trained physicians, whose focus was on theoretical concerns relating to human anatomy and disease, barber-surgeons in 17th-century Holland dealt with practical matters like treating minor ailments, setting broken bones, and performing simple surgeries. Often mistakenly equated with quack doctors, hucksters who hawked entirely useless wares to unsuspecting clients, barber-surgeons were in reality trained professionals. In many Dutch cities, barber-surgeons were compelled to undertake rigorous apprenticeships that could last five years or more before being allowed to ply their trade (see R. Baer and I. Kennedy, ‘Professions and Trades’, in Class Distinctions: Dutch Painting in the Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer, ed. R. Baer, Boston, 2015, pp. 177-78).
Images of doctors, barber-surgeons, dentists, and quacks were particularly popular subjects with Leiden artists, perhaps in part because the city’s university was home to one of the finest medical faculties in all of Europe. Dou, who lived and worked in Leiden his entire life, painted no fewer than seven extant paintings of these subjects, the other six of which reside today in leading public collections (see R. Baer, The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613-1675), Ph.D. dissertation, 1990, I, no. 27, II, nos. 58, 62, 97, 98, 113, and 124). As with all of these paintings, save the early Dentist in the Louvre that has generally been dated to c. 1630-35, the present painting is a mature work by the artist. The proliferation of luxury objects and the theatrical presentation of the image, evident in the girl’s anguished facial expression and the pulled away curtain, would argue in favor of a dating in the first half of the 1660s. Indeed, the same brass ewer and striped sash appear again in a painting of a doctor that has traditionally been dated to these years (Copenhagen, Statens Museum for Kunst).
That the man in the present painting occupies a social position lower than that of a medical doctor would seem to be confirmed by details of his dress. His slashed sleeves and ruffed collar come closer to the clothing worn by the man in Dou’s famed Quack (Rotterdam, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen) than any of the artist’s images of medical doctors, whom Dou generally depicted wearing a tabbard—a long, sleeveless outer garment associated with doctors, lawyers, and clergy, all of whom were university-trained professionals.
The precise event depicted in this work has been a source of some debate. When the painting was sold in 1731, the scene was described as a surgeon pulling a tooth (‘Een Chirurgyn die een Meisje een’ tand treckt’); however, two years later it appeared as a quack lifting the girl’s uvula (‘Een…Quakzalver, die een Meysje de huyg ligt vol bywerk’). The 1660 posthumous edition of the Schat der ongesontheydt, a widely-read manual on health by the Dordrecht city physician Johan van Beverwijck (1594-1647), devoted an entire chapter to the various problems of the uvula and how to cure them. For a swollen uvula, which appears to be the young girl’s affliction in the present painting, van Beverwijck recommended rubbing the tissue with an instrument coated with salt and pepper.
“Lifting the uvula”—lichten van de huig—was also a common expression in Dutch and appears frequently in books of proverbs published by the likes of Johannes Sartorius (1500-c. 1560/70) and Carolus Tuinman (1659-1728). It implied hurting someone and taking advantage of the situation by robbing them, most notably by stealing their money. The proverb may well be the key to the painting’s meaning, laying bare popular perceptions about the limited efficacy of contemporary medical practices.
The present painting enjoys an exceptional early provenance. It is first documented in the collection of Cornelis Wittert van Valkenburg, the second son of Adriaen Wittert, Lord of Lange Backersoort and Deyffelsbroeck (1626-1712), the wealthiest Catholic resident of Rotterdam. Wittert’s collection, which included six further paintings by Dou as well as Sir Anthony van Dyck’s Rest on the Flight to Egypt (St. Petersburg, Hermitage), was among the finest in the early 18th century. The present painting brought the second highest price at his 1731 sale, second only to Dou’s Herring Seller (St. Petersburg, Hermitage). It was subsequently in the collection of the affluent diplomat Adriaan Bout, who, in addition to collecting, served as an agent to Johann Wilhelm, Elector Palatine (1690-1716) and Franz Georg von Schönborn, Archbishop Elector of Trier (1682-1756). The painting next passed to the collector and gentleman dealer Willem Lormier, who, on 21 June 1748 sold it and sixteen other paintings for the enormous sum of 21,525 guilders to Marc René Voyer, Marquis d’Argenson, one of the earliest and most important French collectors of Dutch paintings.
Images of doctors, barber-surgeons, dentists, and quacks were particularly popular subjects with Leiden artists, perhaps in part because the city’s university was home to one of the finest medical faculties in all of Europe. Dou, who lived and worked in Leiden his entire life, painted no fewer than seven extant paintings of these subjects, the other six of which reside today in leading public collections (see R. Baer, The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613-1675), Ph.D. dissertation, 1990, I, no. 27, II, nos. 58, 62, 97, 98, 113, and 124). As with all of these paintings, save the early Dentist in the Louvre that has generally been dated to c. 1630-35, the present painting is a mature work by the artist. The proliferation of luxury objects and the theatrical presentation of the image, evident in the girl’s anguished facial expression and the pulled away curtain, would argue in favor of a dating in the first half of the 1660s. Indeed, the same brass ewer and striped sash appear again in a painting of a doctor that has traditionally been dated to these years (Copenhagen, Statens Museum for Kunst).
That the man in the present painting occupies a social position lower than that of a medical doctor would seem to be confirmed by details of his dress. His slashed sleeves and ruffed collar come closer to the clothing worn by the man in Dou’s famed Quack (Rotterdam, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen) than any of the artist’s images of medical doctors, whom Dou generally depicted wearing a tabbard—a long, sleeveless outer garment associated with doctors, lawyers, and clergy, all of whom were university-trained professionals.
The precise event depicted in this work has been a source of some debate. When the painting was sold in 1731, the scene was described as a surgeon pulling a tooth (‘Een Chirurgyn die een Meisje een’ tand treckt’); however, two years later it appeared as a quack lifting the girl’s uvula (‘Een…Quakzalver, die een Meysje de huyg ligt vol bywerk’). The 1660 posthumous edition of the Schat der ongesontheydt, a widely-read manual on health by the Dordrecht city physician Johan van Beverwijck (1594-1647), devoted an entire chapter to the various problems of the uvula and how to cure them. For a swollen uvula, which appears to be the young girl’s affliction in the present painting, van Beverwijck recommended rubbing the tissue with an instrument coated with salt and pepper.
“Lifting the uvula”—lichten van de huig—was also a common expression in Dutch and appears frequently in books of proverbs published by the likes of Johannes Sartorius (1500-c. 1560/70) and Carolus Tuinman (1659-1728). It implied hurting someone and taking advantage of the situation by robbing them, most notably by stealing their money. The proverb may well be the key to the painting’s meaning, laying bare popular perceptions about the limited efficacy of contemporary medical practices.
The present painting enjoys an exceptional early provenance. It is first documented in the collection of Cornelis Wittert van Valkenburg, the second son of Adriaen Wittert, Lord of Lange Backersoort and Deyffelsbroeck (1626-1712), the wealthiest Catholic resident of Rotterdam. Wittert’s collection, which included six further paintings by Dou as well as Sir Anthony van Dyck’s Rest on the Flight to Egypt (St. Petersburg, Hermitage), was among the finest in the early 18th century. The present painting brought the second highest price at his 1731 sale, second only to Dou’s Herring Seller (St. Petersburg, Hermitage). It was subsequently in the collection of the affluent diplomat Adriaan Bout, who, in addition to collecting, served as an agent to Johann Wilhelm, Elector Palatine (1690-1716) and Franz Georg von Schönborn, Archbishop Elector of Trier (1682-1756). The painting next passed to the collector and gentleman dealer Willem Lormier, who, on 21 June 1748 sold it and sixteen other paintings for the enormous sum of 21,525 guilders to Marc René Voyer, Marquis d’Argenson, one of the earliest and most important French collectors of Dutch paintings.