.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Wolfgang Stechow (loc. cit.) first suggested the figure in the foremost coach was Amalia von Solms, the widow of the powerful stadholder Frederik Hendrik, who had passed away the year Ruysdael executed this work. Stechow further argued the figure riding in the second carriage was the couple’s son and Frederik’s successor, Willem II. According to Peter Sutton, J.G. van Gelder contended the figure in the second carriage was instead the young Elector of Brandenburg, who is documented as having visited The Hague, identified here by the prominent inclusion of the tower of the city’s Grote Kerk, in 1647 (loc. cit.).
While the figures are too small in scale and too summarily painted to allow for positive identification, Ruysdael’s inclusion of them was no doubt intended to evoke The Hague’s status as a center of political power. Only in rare instances did Ruysdael treat contemporary events, and he is not known to have been the recipient of court patronage. The unusual size of the present painting coupled with its narrative subject, however, suggests it may have been a commissioned work.
The painting’s earliest documented owner was the Deventer collector Herman Aarentz, whose collection also included such masterpieces as Rembrandt’s Flora in The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.
While the figures are too small in scale and too summarily painted to allow for positive identification, Ruysdael’s inclusion of them was no doubt intended to evoke The Hague’s status as a center of political power. Only in rare instances did Ruysdael treat contemporary events, and he is not known to have been the recipient of court patronage. The unusual size of the present painting coupled with its narrative subject, however, suggests it may have been a commissioned work.
The painting’s earliest documented owner was the Deventer collector Herman Aarentz, whose collection also included such masterpieces as Rembrandt’s Flora in The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.