Het Monochrome Banketje

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Still Life with Oysters, Römer, Tazza, Berkemeyer and Buns (Pieter Claesz)
Still life with oysters, Römer, Tazza, Berkemeyer and rolls
Pieter Claesz , ca.1633
Oil on canvas
38 × 53 cm
State art collections, Kassel

The Monochromen Banketje ( Dutch for monochrome banquet picture ) is a special kind of Dutch still life painting of the 17th century - especially the meal still life . These paintings were primarily made in the North Holland city of Haarlem . The main representatives are Pieter Claesz and Willem Claesz. Heda . The heyday was the second quarter of the 17th century (approx. 1625–1650). The monochrome Banquetjes do not show lavish tables, but primarily modest meals (in the sense of a snack ). One of the main features of these paintings is the coloring that has been reduced to one basic tone . Certain objects in these momentary representations are interpreted as symbols of transience ( vanitas ).

On the one hand, the Monochrome Banketje denotes the individual style of the two artists Claesz. and Claesz. Heda in the second quarter of the 17th century, but on the other hand is also of fundamental importance for the development of the still life due to the imitation and the innovative leitmotifs - theming and reduction.

Concept & concept history

Axel Sjöblom, who carried out an investigation into the coloristic development of Dutch still life in 1917, noticed that a number of paintings by artists from the province of Holland had a peculiar colourfulness. Furthermore, he described the painting style of Pieter Claesz as "characteristic of the Haarlem School".

The art historian E. Zarnowska introduced the adjective monochrome into the discussion. She first named the striking fact that seems to unite a large group of paintings - namely, a coloring that has been reduced to one basic tone . Her suggestion for the categorization of the Haarlem paintings she intended was to classify them in a "Période monochrome".

NRA Vroom
De schilders van het monochrome banketje . 1945

The first and to date only comprehensive monograph on this subject was published in 1945 by the Dutch art historian Nicolaas Rudolph Alexander Vroom. The title of the work is De schilders van het monochrome banketje . NRA Vroom established the concept of the monochrome banquet. He followed up on Zarnowska's observation and adopted the adjective monochrome. The second part of the term is explained by the objects in the picture - namely food, dishes, cutlery, etc. - and the contemporary designation of such paintings. Vroom's detailed study on the artists of the Monochrome Banketjes named Pieter Claesz . and Willem Claesz. Heda as the main representative. In addition, Vroom tried to give the many "smaller masters" their deserved fame. On the one hand, the monograph is analytically structured and systematically examines the objects represented, the composition , the colors and the development of the paintings. On the other hand, Vroom also went to work with interpretations, for example when it came to explaining the character of the paintings. Vroom was the first to attribute various unsigned paintings to a specific artist.

Vroom published a two-volume revision of his monograph from 1945 in English in 1980. In the revised text there are additions here and there - mainly to correct errors in the attribution from the first publication and to publish new research results. The conclusion is a third volume, which was published in 1999 and thus posthumously. Vroom's observations, published in 1980 and particularly in 1999, have a strikingly speculative character. This explains why the revision of the original text in two new volumes, culminating in the sometimes daring conjectures in the third supplementary volume, was less gratefully accepted than the study from 1945.

In the publication on Dutch still life painting by the Swedish art historian Ingvar Bergström from 1947, in English translation in 1956, he proposed a separate classification, which is clearly inspired by Vroom's publication. Due to the chronological development, Bergström separated the earlier "early breakfast piece", referred to by Vorenkamp and Vroom as "uitgestalde stilleven", from the later "later breakfast piece". Regarding the latter, he also formulated that those still lifes that also have a coloring that have been reduced to a basic tone could be called “monochrome breakfast-pieces”, which in turn would be synonymous with “ontbijt”. At the same time, however, he pointed out the complexity of the term ontbijt and the associated problems with translation into English.

The term [Het] Monochrome Banketje is still used in research. The obvious falsehood of the adjective monochrome and the obvious inaccuracy of the term and its use in the scientific sense cannot affect this fact . In particular, the often found German translation of Breakfast Still Life is incorrect and inappropriate. In research, the sensible attempt was made to replace the adjective monochrome with the more appropriate adjective tonal , but this was not successful.

The term established by NRA Vroom - Het Monochrome Banketje - has become an indispensable part of research. However, it becomes problematic when it comes to the exact definition of the term and the assignment of paintings. The term is sometimes used in a rather inflationary manner.

precursor

Art history favors a development in which it is assumed that the pictures of meals made mainly in Holland and Flanders would represent a separation from the “panorama of food supplies” of the kitchen and market items by Pieter Aertsen and Joachim Beuckelaer . Kurt Bauch even stated that the still life as such was given its shape in the North Holland city of Haarlem. But it is also possible that the first autonomous meal still life (snack still life) was created in Flanders due to the specialization there on individual motifs. It was there that artists like Osias Beert d. Ä. and Clara Peeters still lifes with motifs that could also be found in the north. An exchange between Holland and Flanders is undeniable.

The special role that Haarlem played in this context is made clear by the paintings, which in research are referred to as display boards . The first generation of painters in Haarlem to deal with this sub-genre of still life is led by Floris van Dyck and Nicolaes Gillis . Referring to Vorenkamp, ​​Vroom called this type of still life very aptly “Het Uitgestalde Stilleven”. Uitstallen means to display something in Dutch and can also be found as a root word in uitstalkast (= showcase / showcase). It is precisely in this way that the viewer in the paintings by Floris van Dyck and Nicolaes Gillis is presented with food and tableware as in a showcase.

Formal characteristics of the monochrome banquet jes

"For the first time in the history of Dutch still life painting, the painterly HOW clearly dominates over the content-related WHAT."

- Sybille Ebert-Schifferer : The history of the still life. (1998), p. 123

Pictorial objects & motifs

Karel Slabbaert
Smoking Still Life , 1641, private property

It can be explained by means of Pieter Claesz. ' Oeuvre shows that the monochrome banketjes did not follow the display boards abruptly, but rather emerged within a transitional phase. However, many paintings are missing from this development due to loss or unknown whereabouts. The paintings of the transitional phase - the 20s of the 17th century - still show a number of objects from the paintings by Nicolaes Gillis and Floris van Dyck.

The Roman and the metal plates, but also the flute glass and the Jan Steen jug were already to be seen on the early Haarlem display boards and are also present in the paintings of the artists. Other objects such as cheese are depicted in a different form - for example, instead of a cheese pyramid as a cheese basket. During this time, a first pool of pictorial objects was established: Römer, Jan-Steen-Kanne, beer glass, Tazza, etc. a. These are combined with objects that are less often found in the paintings: Last Supper cups , gilded lidded goblets , serviettes and rod glasses, etc. a.

Within the pictorial structure, there is a hand objects that mainly only as window dressing occur, and secondly, that determine the image objects subject. The latter make it possible to divide the still lifes of the first half of the 17th century into clear types - especially those of the 1930s. The paintings of the 1920s also show corresponding tendencies. However, in these the different types such as snack picture, vanitas still life, smoking still life and fish still life (= a representation of unprepared, freshly caught fish; ≠ fish meal) are not yet so clearly separated from each other.

Strictly speaking, vanitas still lifes and smokers still lifes - due to the lack of reference to a meal - do not count towards the monochrome banquet. Nevertheless, they are often referred to as such, since they agree with this in terms of the other formal properties. At no time did the still life of flowers show any influence from the clay painting of the Haarlem still life painters.

The following types of still lifes make up the number of paintings known as Monochrome Banketjes:

The reduced arrangement
These are absolutely reduced representations (of meals). It happens that only a single wine glass forms the main motif. In these paintings, objects made of glass were particularly popular with objects made of metal. The possibility that these could be real meals is unlikely. Rather, these paintings from the 20s and 30s of the 17th century resemble object studies. Martina Brunner-Bulst named these paintings in Claesz's oeuvre. "Classical Masterpieces".
The meal still life
In these paintings, a meal is the main subject of the picture. The focus can be: the fruit pie, seafood, the fish meal, a ham with a mustard pot or a roast. In some examples these paintings are enriched by fruit ensembles . Pieter Claesz. trusted in the help of his painter colleague Roelof Koets several times. These paintings form the core of the Monochrome Banquetjes.
The smoking still life
Smoking utensils such as clay pipes , tobacco, tobacco containers and pipe lighter thematically determine these paintings. The smoking utensils are, on the one hand, a separate type established in the 20s of the 17th century, but also a motif that could be combined with others. Still lifes of this kind are often referred to as rookertje or toebackje . The smoking still life is a type of Haarlem still life painting, the Pieter Claesz. completely reimagined. Because such objects are neither on the paintings of the older Dutch generation of painters, nor on the still lifes before Claesz. ' first known smoking still life from 1622.
The vanitas still life
Smoking was interpreted as futile pastime and symbolized as the transience of all earthly and Vanity ( Vanitas ) of man. There is an interface here with the smoking still lifes. At the same time, however, paintings were also created with even more unambiguous objects such as skulls , pocket watches , candles, shells, etc. a. The vanitas still life did not emerge in the course of the monochrome banquet, but has its roots in older traditions. It was only made by artists like Claesz. and Claesz. Heda adapted to the prevailing style of clay painting. The real center of the Vanitas still life is not Haarlem, but the university city of Leiden .

composition

In his 1945 study, NRA Vroom pointed to the importance of diagonals and lines in the paintings of the Haarlem masters. In continuation of this basic idea, three essential compositional concepts can be demonstrated for the Monochrome Banketjes . All three composition schemes appear as early as the 20s and early 30s of the 17th century.

Composition scheme Sample painting features
Triangle arrangement Willem Claesz. Heda, Still Life with Herring, Romans, Tazza and a Pocket Watch, 1629, Mauritshuis, The Hague This is the structure of the arrangement on the table, starting from one of the two vertical sides of the picture. This results in the basic figure of a right triangle . In this scheme there is only one compositional support. Martina Brunner-Bulst wrote that within the paintings of the 20s of the 17th century the focus of the composition had gradually moved away from the center of the picture. Vroom sees this compositional principle as the prototype for the early 17th century snack picture.
oblique-pyramidal arrangement Willem Claesz. Heda, Still Life with Oyster Plate and Jan Steen Jug, 1656 (or 1636) This scheme is an arrangement of the objects in the picture according to an imaginary and mostly compact pyramid side - also with only one compositional support, the upper tip of which tends more or less towards the center of the picture. At an early stage in Heda's oeuvre, this compositional scheme superseded the first scheme, which Claesz. preferred. Erika Gemar-Költzsch called this type of composition “The Amsterdam Composition Principle”.
Composition supports left & right Pieter Claesz, Still Life with Smoking Tool, Herring and Beer Glass, 1647, Fine Arts Museum, San Francisco The third scheme corresponds to an arrangement of the objects with two composition supports. The picture is framed by these. This directs the viewer's gaze to the objects that are arranged around the center of the picture.

Lighting control

In almost all monochrome banquets, an indirect light source provides the lighting in the picture. This is usually a high-level and traditionally half-darkened window, recognizable in the reflections on the objects. The light and the design of surfaces through light and shadow is an important characteristic of the Haarlem still lifes. Light is traditionally used as a structural medium and creates perspective . A new task of the light was to establish an atmosphere and mood in the picture. The background in particular was acquired from the 20s of the 17th century and matured in the 30s as a new area of ​​light observation. In addition, by imitating optical effects such as light reflections, the artists succeed in modeling a previously unknown surface.

Format & dimensions

Large dimensions, as they were still possible in the display boards of the previous generation of painters (Nicolaes Gillis and Floris van Dyck), were discarded as standard dimensions in the 1830s, as a result of the 1920s. But the small dimensions (less than 50 centimeters) are just as small. The established standard width is 50 to 70 cm. The landscape format is most common in the monochrome banquets. There are also three other verifiable formats, namely the portrait format, the square and the oval. The turn to the portrait format from the 30s of the 17th century in the oeuvres of the artists always went hand in hand with the monumentalization and ennoblement of the objects depicted and points to the influence of the paintings from Amsterdam - especially those by Jan Jansz. the Uyl .

colourfulness

What is striking is the fact that the coloring in the monochrome banquets differs significantly from the real colors of the objects shown and instead has a uniform color tone as the basic tone of the picture. It is possible that tendencies to reduce local colors already stem from the display boards. It is also assumed that Dutch landscape painting , which set new accents at the beginning of the 17th century, had a strong influence on the other genres and thus stimulated the trend of reducing color and increasing the importance of light (atmosphere). In purely formal terms, clear differences can be shown within the clay painting style. The different painters preferred different colors. There are three different methods of clay painting. Generally the colors brown, green, gray or black dominated the arrangement as the basic tone.

Keynote Sample painting features
brown base tone Pieter Claesz., Still Life with Herring, Buns and Beer Glass, 1636, Boijmans Van Beuningen Museum, Rotterdam Here, the color of all objects in the picture was adjusted to a desired atmospheric basic tone. Vroom wrote that the gray-brown basic tone became an essential characteristic of the paintings by Pieter Claesz. has been. The tonal color spectrum of the objects shown corresponds to the likewise toned background. The rich brown as the basic tone of the color palette can also be found in Roelof Koets, Cornelis Cruys, Adriaen Kraen and Jan Fris.
green-gray basic tone Willem Claesz. Heda, Still Life with Pate, Pewter Dish, and Golden Lidded Cup, 1635, National Gallery of Art, Washington With this, second, method, the uniform basic tone is created by the fact that certain objects with a similar color character receive a special presence and attention or even dominate the arrangement numerically and thus also in color. Heda often used a greenish base tone. Here, too, the background is designed according to the basic tone. In contrast to the paintings with a brown base tone, which are filled with a warm atmosphere, those with a green-gray base tone appear reserved, factual and sometimes even cool. Heda's son Gerret adopted his father's color scheme.
another basic tone
(neither brown nor green)		 Jan van de Velde, Still Life with a Smoking Tool, Oysters, Stick Glass and Lemons, 1647, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam A third color scheme is defined by the enormously increased emphasis on the light reflections of individual objects, whereby the painted surrounding space in the painting first appears gray, then very dark and finally monochrome black. Presumably this color scheme arose from the brown base tone, which became steadily darker. Jan Jansz played a pioneering role in this. the Uyl. With this Amsterdam artist in particular, it becomes clear how strongly color and light are linked in order to achieve an overall impression and contrasts. This method occupies a special position, as it was only established in the 1640s and formed the transition to still life painting with different premises. This design of the background clearly points in the direction of the painting of Willem Kalf .

successor

The first initiative to name a successor style came from Bergström. The confirmation was given by some art historians under the guidance of Sam Segal. Thus the name of splendid still lifes established itself for the paintings, which had their prime especially in the second half of the 17th century . Sam Segal and his colleagues chose the English adjective sumptuous because it most clearly expresses the character of these still lifes. According to Segal, the majority of the magnificent still lifes all show a clear tendency towards luxury. Segal can prove that the magnificent still life developed from the snack pictures popular in Holland; however, there are also precursors that would be even further back. The contemporary art of the Flemish Frans Snyders is also not insignificant . However, Segal recognized that the term was ambiguous and therefore added that a number of paintings could be assigned to both styles. The paintings, which Bergström and Segal described as splendid still lifes, distinguish themselves from the monochrome banketjes by the fact that there is a return to local color. Furthermore, the artists removed the motif boundaries so that all imaginable foods and objects could be presented on the board. It is not uncommon for the richly laid tables in the magnificent still lifes to appear almost overloaded. To give a clear idea of ​​the sumptuous still life , Segal used three artistic personalities whose fame and influence in this regard cannot be questioned:

"The true masters of the pronk still life are Jan Davidsz. de Heem, Abraham van Beyeren and Willem Kalf. "

- Sam Segal & William B. Jordan : A prosperous past. The sumptuous still life in the Netherlands. (1989), p. 17

literature

reference books

  • General artist lexicon (AKL). The visual artists of all times and peoples. KG Saur, Munich and Leipzig 1991ff., ISBN 3-598-22740-X .
  • Walther Bernt: The Dutch Painters of the 17th Century. 800 artists with 1470 illus. 3 vol. Münchner Verlag, Munich 19XX.
  • Erika Gemar-Költzsch: Dutch still life painter in the 17th century. Luca-Verlag, Lingen 1995, ISBN 3-923641-41-9 .
  • Fred G. Meijer & Adriaan van der Willigen: A dictionary of Dutch and Flemish still-life painters working in oils. 1525-1725. Primavera Press, Leiden 2003, ISBN 90-74310-85-0 .
  • Wolf Stadler: Lexicon of Art. Painting, architecture, sculpture. 12 vols. Herder, Freiburg (Breisgau) (inter alia) 1987-90.
  • Ulrich Thieme, Felix Becker (Hrsg.): General Lexicon of Fine Artists from Antiquity to the Present . Leipzig 1907 to 1950.

Monographs & exhibition catalogs

  • Kurt Bauch: The early Rembrandt and his time. Studies on the historical significance of his early style. Mann, Berlin 1960 (on the Haarlem still life: p. 21ff).
  • Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century . Translated from the Swedish by Christina Hedström and Gerald Taylor. Faber & Faber, London 1956.
  • Pieter Biesboer (among others): Pieter Claesz: (1596 / 7-1660), Meester van het stilleven in de Gouden Eeuw. (Aust.cat .: Frans-Halsmuseum Haarlem 2005). Uitgeverij Waanders BV, Zwolle 2004, ISBN 90-400-9005-X .
  • Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlemer still life in the 17th century. Critical oeuvre catalog. Luca-Verlag, Lingen 2004, ISBN 3-923641-22-2 .
  • Laurens Bol: Dutch painters of the 17th century, close to the great masters: landscapes and still lifes . Klinkhardt & Biermann, Braunschweig 1969.
  • Pamela Hibbs Decoteau: Clara Peeters: 1594 - ca.1640, and the development of still-life painting in northern Europe. Luca-Verlag, Lingen 1992, ISBN 3-923641-38-9 .
  • Sybille Ebert-Schifferer: The history of the still life. Hirmer, Munich 1998, ISBN 3-7774-7890-3 .
  • HE van Gelder: W. Heda, A. van Beyeren, W. Kalf. Becht, Amsterdam 1941.
  • Claus Grimm: Still life. The Dutch and German masters. Belser, Stuttgart (inter alia) 1988, ISBN 3-7630-1945-6 .
  • Eddy de Jongh (Ed.): Still-life in the age of Rembrandt. (Aust.cat .: Auckland City Art Gallery & National Art Gallery Wellington & Robert McDougall Art Gallery Christchurch 1982). Auckland City Art Gallery, Auckland 1982, ISBN 0-86463-101-4 .
  • Eddy de Jongh (and others): Tot lering en vermaak: betekenissen van Hollandse genrevoorstellingen uit de zeventiende eeuw. (Aust.cat .: Rijksmuseum Amsterdam 1976). Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1976.
  • Gerhard Langemeyer & Hans-Albert Peeters (eds.): Still life in Europe. (Aust.kat .: Westphalian State Museum for Art and Cultural History Münster & State Art Hall Baden-Baden 1980). Regional Association of Westphalia-Lippe, Münster 1979.
  • Koos Levy-Van Halm (Red.): De trots van Haarlem. Promotion van een stad in art en historie. (Aust.cat .: Frans Halsmuseum Haarlem & Teylers Museum Haarlem 1995). Haarlem (et al.) 1995.
  • Fred G. Meijer: The Ashmolean Museum Oxford. Catalog of the Collection of Paintings. The Collection of Dutch and Flemish Still Life Paintings Bequeathed by Daisy Linda Ward. Zwolle 2003.
  • Roswitha Neu-Kock (Red.): Still life - Natura Morta. In the Wallraf-Richartz-Museum and in the Museum Ludwig. (Aust.cat .: Wallraf-Richartz-Museum and Museum Ludwig Cologne 1980). Museums of the City of Cologne, Cologne 1980.
  • Michael North: History of the Netherlands. Beck, Munich 2003, ISBN 3-406-41878-3 .
  • Simon Schama: Overvloed en onbehagen: de Nederlandse cultuur in de Gouden Eeuw. Translated from the English by Eugène Dabekaussen, Barbara de Lange en Tilly Maters. Contact, Amsterdam 1988, ISBN 90-254-6838-1 .
  • Norbert Schneider: Still life. Reality and symbolism of things; the still life painting of the early modern period. Taschen, Cologne 1989, ISBN 3-8228-0398-7 .
  • Sam Segal & William B. Jordan: A prosperous past. The sumptuous still life in the Netherlands. 1600-1700. (Aust.cat .: Delft & Cambridge & Massachusetts & Texas). SDU Publ., The Hague 1989, ISBN 90-12-06238-1 .
  • Sam Segal: Jan Davidsz. de Heem en zijn kring. (Aust.cat .: Utrecht & Braunschweig 1991). SDU Publ., Utrecht 1991, ISBN 90-12-06661-1 .
  • Axel Sjöblom: The coloristic development of the Dutch still life in the 17th century. Dissertation Würzburg 1917.
  • APA Vorenkamp: Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Hollandsch stilleven in de 17 eeuw: proefschrift the Verkrijging van den graad van doctor in de letteren en wijsbegeerte aan de Rijks-Universiteit te Leiden. NV Leidsche Uitgeversmaatschappij, Leiden 1933.
  • NRA Vroom: A modest message as intimated by the painters of the "Monochrome banketje" . Vol. 1 & 2: Interbook International, Schiedam 1980, Vol. 3: Wilson DMK, Nuremberg 1999.
  • NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. Kosmos, Amsterdam 1945.
  • E. Zarnowska: La nature Morte hollondaise. Les principaux représentants - ses origins - son influence. Brussels / Maastricht 1929.

Essays & Articles

  • Julie Berger Hochstrasser: Imag (in) ing prosperity. Painting and material culture in the 17th century Dutch household. In: Jan de Jong (Ed.): Wooncultuur in de Nederlanden. 1500-1800 = The art of home in the Netherlands. Zwolle 2001. Waanders, Zwolle 2001, ISBN 90-400-9539-6 , pp. 194-235 ( Nederlands kunsthistorisch jaarboek. 51).
  • Pieter de Boer: Jan Jansz. the Uyl. In: Oud Holland . 57, 1940, pp. 48-64.
  • Hanneke Grootenboer: Truth in Breakfast Painting. Horror Vacui versus the void and Pascal's Geometrical Rhetoric. In: Hanneke Grootenboer: The Rhetoric of Perspective. Realism and illusion in seventeenth-century Dutch still-life painting. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago 2005, ISBN 0-226-30968-1 , pp. 61-95.
  • Eddy de Jongh: De interpretatie van stillevens: boundaries en mogelijkheden. In: Eddy de Jongh: Kwesties van betekenis. Subject en motief in de Nederlandse schilderkunst van de zeventiende eeuw. Primavera Pers, Leiden 1995, ISBN 90-74310-14-1 , pp. 130-148.
  • Fred G. Meijer: Breakfast Still Life and Monochrome Bankejtes. In: Art & Antiques. 1-2, 1993, pp. 19-23.
  • Fred G. Meijer: Still Life paintings from the Netherlands, Still Lifes: Techniques and Style, A Modest Message as intimated by the Painters of the 'Monochrome Banketje' Vol. 3. In: Oud Holland. , 114, 2000.
  • J. Michael Montias: Cost and Value in seventeenth-century Dutch art. In: Art History. 10, 1987, pp. 455-466.
  • NA: Pieter Claesz. Silent venues as a specialism. In: Kunstbeeld. 29, 2005, pp. 50-52.
  • PJJ van Thiel: Een stilleven door Pieter Claesz. In: Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum. 23, 1975, pp. 119-121.
  • PJJ van Thiel: Stilleven met kalkoenpastei. Pieter Claesz. 1597 / 98-1661. In: Versl - Ver - Rembrandt. 1974, pp. 22-24.
  • Elsbeth Veldpape: Eenvoud en sfeer. Over de sobere, monochrome banketjes van Pieter Claesz. In: Vitrine (Museumstijdschrift openbaar kunstbezit Den Haag). 17, 2004, pp. 18-23.

Notes and individual references

  1. ↑ Axel Sjöblom: The coloristic development of the Dutch still life in the 17th century. (1917), p. 39.
  2. ^ E. Zarnowska: La nature Morte hollondaise . (1929), p. XIIf.
  3. ↑ APA Vorenkamp pointed out, taking into account the artist inventories of Abraham Bredius, that terms like ontbijtje and banketje were used as contemporary designations in the 17th century.
    See: APA Vorenkamp: Bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Hollandsch stilleven in de 17 eeuw. (1933), p. 6ff.
  4. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 88ff.
  5. ^ NRA Vroom: A modest message as intimated by the painters of the "Monochrome banketje" . Vol. 1 & 2: Interbook International, Schiedam 1980.
  6. ^ NRA Vroom: A modest message as intimated by the painters of the "Monochrome banketje" . Vol. 3: Wilson DMK, Nuremberg 1999.
  7. ↑ "Surveying his publications, and certainly his last one, one senses throughout his commitment to this subject, but at the same time the tragedy of the fact that - despite his own conviction that he had succeeded - he could not really put his finger on the diversity of hands which treated his beloved monochrome banketje. The texts published in this book, which often read almost like personal correspondence or even a private diary, should - for his own good - have remainded unpublished. "
    Fred G. Meijer: Still Life paintings from the Netherlands, Still Lifes. (2000), p. 234.
  8. ^ Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century. (1956), pp. 89ff
  9. ↑ APA Vorenkamp: bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Hollandsch stilleven in de 17 eeuw. (1933), p. 24f.
  10. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 10.
  11. ^ Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century. (1956), p. 112ff.
  12. ^ Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century. (1956), p. 112.
  13. ↑ u. a. also here: Joseph Lammers: Fasting and Enjoyment. The set table as a theme of still life. (1980), p. 408.
  14. ↑ For the history of the associated terminology, see here: Still Life # Concept History
  15. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 158.
  16. ↑ Claus Grimm: Still life. The Dutch and German masters. (1988), p. 370.
  17. ↑ Kurt Bauch: The early Rembrandt and his time. (1960), p. 27.
  18. ↑ Claus Grimm: Still life. The Dutch and German masters. (1988), p. 81.
  19. ↑ APA Vorenkamp: bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van het Hollandsch stilleven in de 17 eeuw. (1933), p. 24f.
  20. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 10.
  21. ↑ FCM Stoks (ed.): Van Dale. Handwoordenboek. Nederlands-Duits. Van Dale Lexicography, Utrecht (et al.) 2000, p. 692.
  22. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), pp. 21ff & 55ff.
  23. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 165.
  24. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 182.
  25. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 26.
  26. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 155.
  27. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), cat. 4.
  28. ↑ Erika Gemar-Költzsch: Dutch still life painters in the 17th century. (1995), pp. 25f (Vol. 1).
  29. ↑ Erika Gemar-Költzsch: Dutch still life painters in the 17th century. (1995), pp. 86f (vol. 1).
  30. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), pp. 28 & 62.
  31. ↑ See: NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 32.
  32. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 162.
  33. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 34.
  34. ↑ Erika Gemar-Költzsch: Dutch still life painters in the 17th century. (1995), p. 43 (vol. 1).
  35. ↑ Kurt Bauch: The early Rembrandt and his time. (1960), pp. 27f.
  36. ^ Martina Brunner-Bulst: Pieter Claesz .: the main master of the Haarlem still life in the 17th century. (2004), p. 172f.
  37. ↑ 'Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century . (1956), p. 112.
  38. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), p. 32.
  39. ^ NRA Vroom: De Schilders Van Het Monochrome Banketje. (1945), pp. 66f.
  40. ^ Pieter de Boer: Jan Jansz. the Uyl. (1940), p. 51.
  41. ^ Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century . (1956), p. 153.
  42. ^ Ingvar Bergström: Dutch still-life painting in the seventeenth century . (1956), p. 134.
  43. ↑ Sam Segal & William B. Jordan: A prosperous past. (1989).
  44. ↑ Sam Segal & William B. Jordan: A prosperous past. (1989), p. 15.
  45. ↑ Sam Segal & William B. Jordan: A prosperous past. (1989), p. 28.
  46. ↑ Sybille Ebert-Schifferer: The story of the still life. (1998), p. 104.
  47. ^ "Pieter Claesz and Willem Claesz. Heda are known as the great masters of the monochrome banquet pieces. Some of their works can be called pronk still lifes, but the presence of less luxurious food, such as an ham, mackarel, salmon (a common food in those days), cake and pastries, of less expensive pewter utensils and Dutch or German glassware makes the distinction between the pronk still life and the banquet piece rather vague. "
    Sam Segal & William B. Jordan: A prosperous past. (1989), p. 17.