"Portrait of Van Dyck?" is a drawing after a portrait by Van Dyck

Vanderkindere, from Belgium,  sells on 29 May 2018 a, "Attributed to Cornelis Visscher" drawing of an artist, "Portrait de Antoine Van Dyck" (?), estimated at 600 to 800 Euro. 

The drawing, which was exhibited in Dordrecht in 1968, is definitely not a portrait of Van Dyck, who was a self-confident dandy, not the slightly hunched man shown here. 

It is a copy after a work by Van Dyck though, his portrait of Hendrick Steenwyck (Hendrik van Steenwijk II, 1580-1640), painter of church interiors. The drawing is good, nothing spectacular though, and whether such a copy is by Visscher or someone else is very hard to tell. But in any case you aren't buying an unknown portrait of Van Dyck, nor an original invention, so the estimate is perhaps a bit high here.

4 "Flemish school" paintings: work by Willem van Herp? Or after Marten de Vos?

Lamas Bolaño, from Spain, sells on 22 March 2018 two sets of two paintings from the "Flemish School, 17th century", estimated at 5,500 to 7,000 Euro per pair.

The works are related to paintings by Willem van Herp (1613-1677), but the condition doesn't really allow me to discern whether they are by or after him. Lot 1162 shows the "works of men", while lot 1169 displays Biblical scenes. The works have Latin texts at the bottom, but they are too small to decipher for me.

The second painting for sale shows people working on the land. This is a fragment of a painting by Willem Van Herp from a series on stories from Genesis, which was sold at Sotheby's in 2006, as can be seen at the RKD.

The final one is the easiest to recognise, as it shows the building of the Ark of Noach. This as well is part of a painting by Van Herp from the same series, again showing the bottom right corner of the larger work (thanks to the RKD again!).

But in this case the differences are more pronounced, and I was able to find another, better work much closer to the painting for sale. I haven't been able to find the location or origin of this version, which is given as "Flemish". It is very close to the work for sale, with the identical castle in the upper right and so on, but in much better condition and probably better painted as well.
 

Perhaps it is the original work at the basis of this engraving by Sadeler. It is based on a design by Marten de Vos, but one would expect the engraving to be in the reverse direction of the painting (this isn't always the case, but in the vast majority of cases this reversion is the result).

So it may well be that Van Herp isn't the artist behind these paintings (directly or as inspiration), but that Van Herp and our anonymous artist both used the same engravings as their starting point.

And sure enough, we also find engravings for other works in the series, like the Methusalem, and Cain in the smithy (which means we have now not only found the origin for these works, but also identified the stories behind them, yay!)

The estimate seems rather steep for copies after engravings, but they form a nice set in any case: 4,000 to 5,000 for the 4 together seems more realistic though.

"Cardinal Howard" is Lord High Admiral Charles Howard

Van Ham, from Germany, sells on 31 January 2018 an "English Master, 17th/18th century" portrait of Cardinal Howard, estimated at 200 to 400 Euro.

The portrait shows someone with the Order of the Garter with the Great George (the image of George slaying the Drgaon), which facilitates the identification of the sitter, as this is a very exclusive club.

Some searching, helped by the fact that the sitter indeed was a Howard, led me to Charles Howard, 1st Earl of Nottingham (1536-1624), the English commander at the time of the Armada, so a major figure in English history of the period. 

The painting for sale is a poor partial copy of a portrait by Daniel Mytens (the major portrait painter in England before the arrival of Anthiny Van Dyck), from ca. 1620. It is now housed in the Greenwich Museum. Some colours have been changed, so perhaps it is based on an engraving, but it seeems more likely to be a copy of the painting with some artistic license added. 

The value of the work is probably about the estimate, but having the correct identification may help attract the bidders: I wiould guess there are more marine history buffs wanting this, than people interested in a portrait of some Cardinal Howard.

"C. 1800 Massacre of the innocents" is neither

Horta, from Belgium, sells on 22 January 2018 a "Flemish School, ca. 1800" "Massacre of the Innocents", an oil on copper estimated at 3,500 to 5,000 Euro.

The work depicts the slaying of adult women, and their immediate elevation to the sainthood as martyrs, and is thus obviously not a "massacre of the innocents" which involves babies and toddlers. The most famous episode of such a massacre in old master paintings is probably the story of Saint Ursula and her 11,000 virgins (known from the Memling masterpiece or someone like the Master of the Saint Ursula Legend).

The work for sale is painted by or after the Francken workshop (though it is one of the many mediocre Francken pieces, not one of the rarer examples which show the true genius of some of the Francken family members). Another, much dirtier but otherwise very similar version was sold as "circle of Frans Francken II" by Christie's in 2011 for £2,250. The version for sale now is not the cleaned version of that one though, which has an extra figure at the bottom centre, and is marginally larger (56 by 74 instead of 54 by 70 cm).

A much better version by Francken can also be found online, but I haven't found the location or auction house or price behind this one.

As happened quite a few times, the origin of the composition is not a Francken, but Peter Paul Rubens. Copyright and plagiarism were regarded differently then than they are now... These preliminary versions can be found in the Palazzo Ducale in Mantua (RKD), and in the Museum of Brussels (again, RKD)

As a Circle of Francken II "Saint Ursula" from c. 1650, the estimate is probably about right.

And if you like Francken, you can also check out this "Flemish School 17th century" Resurrection of Lazarus, estimated at 400 to 600€, from the same auction. It is again a work from the circle of the Franckens (especially the Lazarus is identical across many interpretations, the position of the Christ changes somewhat from version to version). It is badly damaged, but cheap, and as Franckens go it is one of the better (though not top quality of course)!

UPDATE: the Saint Ursula sold for 2200 Euro (and had its description changed after I wrote my post), and the Lazarus for 400 Euro.

"Venus and Soldier" is Venus and Mars after Crispijn van der Passche

Macaigne, from France, sells on 21 January 2018 a "Flemish School, 16th century" Venus and Soldier, estimated at 6,000 to 8,000 Euro.

It is a slightly modified copy after an engraving by Crispijn Van de Passe (1589-1611), probably an original design by him ("fecit and excudit" the engraving says at the bottom). As such, it isn't worth the estimate but closer to 2,000 Euro.

Wise and Foolish Virgins

Accademia Fine Art, from Monaco, sells on 17 December 2017 an "Attributed to Frans Francken" scene of merrymaking, estimated at 7,000 to 9,000 Euro.

The scene is the Parable of the 5 Wise and the 5 Foolish Virgins, which was quite popular in the 17th century in Flanders and is known from a few recurring compositions (see e.g. my post from April 2015).

This one can indeed be situated with the Franckens, although one sold at Christie's in 2009 was attributed to Pieter Lisaert, according to the RKD. That one fetched $25,000. The main difference, apart from the quality and condition, seems to be the castle scene on the upper right, where the foolish virgins are drinking wine. Daring! The dimensions are nearly identical though (72 by 105 vs. 73 by 104)

Another version is attributed to Francken.

The copy for sale is rather weak and definitely not made by Francken himself, and the estimate seems rather steep. Getting 3,000 to 4,000 for it would be a very good result.

UPDATE: not sold, again for sale on 31 January 2018 (now as a Frans Francken II, not "attributed to"!) with an estimate of 3,200 to 3,800 Euro, which is more realistic but still optimistic.

A nice Flemish drawing at the same auction (which had already been offered last year, if my memory doesn't deceive me), is actually a copy after Gerard Seghers (engraving by Paulus Pontius). The 320 Euro estimate certainly isn't excessive, but don't expect to buy an original design by a master...

Harp

Rops, from Belgium, sells on 17 December 2017 a "18th century" King Salomon, estimated at 4,000 to 5,000 Euro.

No idea who painted it, it is too generic and not showing enough character to place it with or close to a specific painter, but I can tell you two things: it is a King David, not a King Salomon, and the beautiful harp is not a new invention but copied with minor modifications (making it less explicit, which may also explain the changed position of the harp).

It can be found originally on a painting of the same subject by Domenichino, some 200 years earlier. Our painter may have learned about it from a print (example from the British Museum).

The estimate seems somewhat optimistic, but Rops has surprisingly high results sometimes.

Reversed libraries in this work (perhaps by Marten van Valckenborch)

De Zwaan, from the Netherlands, sells on 1 November 2017 as lot 4509 a "Northern European School, ca. 1600" portrait of a seated man, estimated at 1,500 to 2,000 Euro.

It is a reasonably well painted  work, but far from a masterpiece or a great artist. It has a partly erased inscription, which I sadly can't decipher completely:
"... Reinius Hisp.
Et. S. Anno LXII"

The top line seems to be his name, Reinius (? A Latinised version of Rein or Reinier perhaps, if I read it correctly) an "Hisp." an abbreviation of Hispanicus or some other word indication a link with Spain. The second line simply says that he is 62 years old. I have so far not found any person who could be matched with this name.

What caught my attention was the library behind the man. Libraries become reasonably common in paintings after 1600, before they are very rare; but I never noticed that in many examples, the books are shown with the spine hidden and the "wrong" side to the front. This seems illogical, as the author name and title can not be seen like this: but in reality many books didn't have these things on the spine yet at the time, while the pages were sometimes gilded or otherwise coloured, and the books were closed with gilded clasps. Showing this side gives a much richer effect than the rather drab spines one so often encounters in this period.

Similar cupboards can be seen in e.g. a portrait by Claes Moeyaert from 1647, or one by Johannes Vinck from 1614, or a third by Samuel Hofmann from 1616. The standard position of books as we usually know it is shown on many other paintings of the period, but this one is not unique, just peculiar.

And researching this painting and topic in the RKD, where all the above images are from, I suddenly came upon a work by Marten van Valckenborch from 1589: this very painting!
The work was in a private collection, but previously sold at Sotheby's London in 1978, and Sotheby's Amsterdam in 1988.
It has not only an attribution, but a better description of the inscription:
'1589. M / V V' (V V beneath the M).
Below, in lighter paint: '...) PLINIVS HISP. / AET.S. ANNO LXII'.

The sitter was said to possibly be Carolus Clusius, who would match the age / date combination, but no idea how the inscribed name comes into play. Looking at other portraits of Clusius seems to indicate that this is not a portrait of him, sadly. The above portrait is from 1585, or only four years before, and shows cleearly a different man.

The attribution to Marten van Valckenborch may well be correct though, even if the name of the supposed sitter should be rejected. He is mainly known from Tower of Babels and works dominated by landscapes, but his few portraits show the same considerable skill and lack of brilliance.

The most interesting comparison can be made with a work by Valckenborch together with Georg Flegel, from 1595-1600, which was for sale at Christie's in 2015 for a staggering $500,000 (but unsold? I can no longer find it at the Christie's site...). The figures were the work of Valckenborch, while Flegel painted the flowers and fruits.

The resemblance in style is quite clear, so an attribution of the work for sale to Marten van Valckenborch seems reasonable.

Remarkable is the similarity between the flowers in the work for sale, and the flowers by Flegel in the Christie's work, especially the large central flower.I am no botanist so I have no idea at all what flower it could be, but it seems too much of a coincidence that it appears in both works (and at the same time shows that the choice of Flegel over Valckenborch for this apect was not without reason).

As a signed Marten van Valckenborch, but far from his best work, it should be worth around 5,000 Euro.

UPDATE: sold for 7200 Euro, more than 3 times the highest estimate and even above my estimate!

UPDATE 2: now again sold at Dorotheum (24 April 2018) as a Marten van Valckenborch, where it fetched  31,250 Euro. A nice profit for whoever bought this a few months ago. Seems too much to me, but it shows the value of picking the right auction house, and even more importantly getting the right attribution (certainly in this case, where it was known all along, not some recent discovery).

"Saint Rosalie" is a Virgin of the Litanies

Tajan, from France, sells on 27 October 2017 a "Spanish School, 18th century" Saint Rosalie and attributes, estimated at 600 to 800 Euro.

The work is comparable to one I highlighted in October 2015, and is a depiction of the Virgin with a number of her typical attributes. No idea where they got the idea of a Saint Rosalie from. As in October 2015, this one is extra interesting because it doesn't just show the Marial attributes but names them as well.

The named attributes here are "Electa ut sol", "Stella Maris", "Sipres suve olo", "Rossa inti" (perhaps the reason they thought it a Saint Rosalie?), "Lilium", "Oliva spe", "Fons Ucna", "Spequlum", "Pulchra ut lunt", "Hortus Conclu" and "Sivitas Dei". These are (with more writing errors) about the same as the one in the 2015 image. The fact that some texts and images are cut down seems to indicate that the painting originally was larger (or that part of the painting is hidden behind a frame?).

The work seems more 17th century than 18th century to me, but is not really wel painted in any case, and is again worth more for its cultural value than for purely artistic value.