PIETER BRUEGEL (AFTER) The Parable of the Blind Leading the Blind. Engraving, circa 1643. 180x228 mm; 7 1/4x9 inches, wide margins. Second state (of 2), with the number and Bible verse designation lower right. Crowned shield with a fleur-de-lys watermark. Published by Claes Jansz. II Visscher. A very good, well-inked impression of this extremely scarce engraving. According to the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, where there are two impressions of this subject, the etching was made by an anonymous 17th century printmaker, published by Amsterdam printseller, Claes Jansz. II Visscher, and based on Bruegel's (1525/30-1569) De parabel der blinden, distemper on linen canvas, 1568, now in the collection of the Museo di Capodimonte, Naples. Etched in reverse of the painting, it employs the same composition with blind men, dressed like vagrants and holding long wooden canes, following a diagonal line across the image to a river in which they will soon fall. As in the painting, there is a village in the background with a church steeple. While there are only three blind men in the engraving, instead of six in Bruegel's painting, the one at the front (who has already fallen in the Bruegel painting) wears a similar hurdy gurdy player as in the painting. The theme of the Blind Leading the Blind derives from Matthew, XV: 13-4, in which Christ, told that he had angered the Pharisees by criticising their spiritual leadership, replied : 'Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' Hieronymous Bosch (circa 1540-1516) painted the earliest known treatment of the theme, in a work known only through a later engraving by Pieter van der Heyden, published by Hieronymous Cock. The subject was visited again in an engraving by Cornelis Massys of circa 1540, showing four figures rather than Bosch's two, before being again depicted by van der Heyden and Cock in 1561, and followed by Bruegel's well-known oil painting.
ANONYMOUS, AFTER ADRIAEN BROUWER (CIRCA 1605/06-1638) OR PIETER BRUEGEL THE Three Plates from: Heads of Peasants and Country-Women (Copies) Plates 108 x 157 mm. (and similar) Sheets 136 x 207 mm. (and similar) (3)
ANONYMOUS, AFTER ADRIAEN BROUWER (CIRCA 1605/06-1638) OR PIETER BRUEGEL Three Plates from: Heads of Peasants and Country-Women (Copies) Plates 108 x 157 mm. (and similar) Sheets 136 x 207 mm. (and similar) (3)
nach. Kämpfende Bauern. Radierung von Wenzel Hollar. 21,6 x 31,9 cm. 1646. Pennington 599, Orenstein (New Hollstein, Bruegel) A 66. Ganz ausgezeichneter, gegensatzreicher Druck auf die Einfassungslinie geschnitten. Leichte Alters- und Gebrauchsspuren, einzelne kleine ausgebesserte und geschlossene Randläsuren bzw. -risse verso, unauffällige geglättete Knickspuren, dünne Stellen, die unteren beiden Ecken ergänzt, der Gesamteindruck gleichwohl gut.
nach. Triumph der Zeit oder des Saturn. Kupferstich.21,1 x 29,9 cm. 1574. Bastelaer 204, Hollstein 204, Orenstein (New Hollstein) 28 I (von IV). Wz. Gotisches P. Noch mit dem Datum und der Adresse Philipps Galles. Die ikonographisch höchst ungewöhnliche Allegorie auf die Vergänglichkeit aller irdischen Dinge und Eitelkeiten hier in einem ausgezeichneten, etwas grauen und tonigen Frühdruck mit schmalem bzw. breiterem Rand um die Plattenkante. Minimale Alters- und Gebrauchsspuren, oben kleine Montierungsreste recto und verso, schwache vertikale Mittelfalte, sonst schön und original erhalten.
nach. Das Gleichnis der klugen und törichten Jungfrauen. Kupferstich von Philips Galle, mit altem Kolorit und Goldhöhung. 22,2 x 29,2 cm. Bastelaer 123, Hollstein 123, Orenstein (New Hollstein) 4 I (von II). Ausgezeichneter Druck meist auf die Einfassungslinie geschnitten, diese jedoch partiell sichtbar. Leichte vertikale Falzspur rechts, etwas angestaubt, einige Bereibungen etwa in den unteren Randbereichen sowie auf der Banderole mittig, dort mit winzigen Löchlein sowie auch an den Wolken, in der Hintergrundarchitektur sowie anderenorts, weitere leichte Erhaltungsmängel, aufgezogen, außerhalb der des Blattes mit einem illusorischen Papierrand ergänzt, insgesamt jedoch gut erhalten.
nach. Der gähnende Bauer. Kupferstich. 20,6 x 20,3 cm. Hollstein (Vorsterman) 130, Orenstein (New Hollstein) A21. Wz. Basilisk. Das ehemals Lucas Vorsterman zugesprochene Blatt in einem ganz ausgezeichneten, lebendig Druck mit der vollen Darstellung. Minimal fleckig, kleines geschlossenes Löchlein auf der Backe des Bauern, weitere unaufällig ausgebesserte Stellen in den äußeren Rändern, leichte Handhabungsspuren, sonst gut erhalten.
nach. Ein Viermaster und zwei Dreimaster vor Anker bei einer Festungsinsel mit Leuchtturm. Radierung und Kupferstich von Frans Huys. 22,2 x 28,8 cm. Um 1561-1565. Bastelaer 104; Hollstein 104; Orenstein (New Hollstein) 68 II (von III). Wz. Bekröntes Lothringer C und Nebenmarke. Mit der Adresse von Galle, aber vor der Löschung der Worte "Cum. privileg". Ausgezeichneter Druck rechts meist mit der Einfassungslinie, oben und links knapp innerhalb der Einfassungslinie beschnitten, unten mit dem Textrand. Vertikale Quetschfalte, kleinere Oberflächenschäden am linken Rand, sonst gut erhalten.
nach. Viermaster und zwei Dreimaster vor Anker bei einer Festungsinsel mit Leuchtturm. Kupferstich von Frans Huys. 22,4 x 29,2 cm. Bastelaer 104 I (von II), Hollstein 104 I (von II), Orenstein (New Hollstein) 68 I (von III). Wz. Gotisches P. Vor der Adresse von Galle und der Nummer. Ganz ausgezeichneter, nuancierter und klarer Frühdruck mit feinem Rändchen an drei Seiten, unten bis knapp an die Plattenkante geschnitten. Vornehmlich verso leicht fleckig, schwache vertikale Mittelfalte, dort oben winziges Quetschfältchen, unterhalb der beiden Enten sowie in der rechten unteren Ecke unauffällige und äußerst sorgsame Ausbesserung mit feiner Federretusche, verso unauffällig geglättete Knickspuren, verso kleine Spuren alter Montage, sonst vorzügliches Exemplar.
nach. Ein niederländisches Frachtschiff und ein Boeier. Radierung und Kupferstich von Frans Huys und Cornelis Cort (?). 1565. 24,1 x 19,4 cm. Bastelaer 98, Hollstein 98, Orenstein (New Hollstein) 62 I (von II). Wz. Kleines Wappen (?). Vor der Löschung des Datums. Ganz ausgezeichneter Druck mit der Plattenkante bzw. partiell bis an diese geschnitten. Schwache Alters- und Gebrauchsspuren, sonst tadellos erhaltenes Exemplar.
A forest landscape with hunters and dogs oil on panel 143/4 x 24 5/8 in. (37.5 x 62.5 cm.) PROVENANCE With Gallery St”cklin, Basel, from whom purchased by the father of the present owner before 1960. NOTES Dr. Klaus Ertz, in a certificate dated August 2002 confirms the attribution to Pieter Brueghel the Younger, and dates the present painting to circa 1605-10. He notes that, unusually, this landscape is derived from a composition by the artist's brother, Jan Brueghel the Elder, that is in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, and which he dates to circa 1595 (see K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere: Die Gem„lde mit Kritischem Oeuvrekatalog, Lingen, 2000, II, p. 944, fig. 747) and is not based on a work by his father, Pieter Bruegel the Elder. Ertz lists another version of this composition in a private American collection (Ertz, op. cit., II, p. 952, no. F1372, illustrated on p. 943, fig. 745). Ertz also writes that, typical for these early works by Pieter Brueghel the Younger, are the two almost bare, dead-looking trees and the almost frayed effect of the leaves on the trees, which hang perfectly still in the absence of any wind. He compares the paintings to three other paintings executed by the artist of similar date (Ertz, op. cit., nos. 1367, 1106 and 1241).
The Misanthrope oil on panel, circular 71/2 in. (19 cm.) diam. PROVENANCE with Galerie de Boer, Amsterdam, before 1934, from whom acquired by the family of the present owner. LITERATURE G. Marlier, Pierre Brueghel le Jeune, Brussels, 1969, p. 146, no. 1d. K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, Lingen, 2000, II, pp. 81-2 and 191, no. E27. EXHIBITION Amsterdam, Galerie de Boer, 1934, Helsche en fluweelen Brueghel, no. 9, fig. 5, lent from a German private collection (i.e. that of the family of the present owner). NOTES The composition is one of the group of roundels depicting proverbs and moralising subjects painted by Pieter Brueghel II, mostly after designs by his father, Pieter Bruegel I. The present type, which is also known as The Faithlessness of the World, derives from the latter's oil in the Museo e Gallerie Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples. An engraving is known of that painting by Jan [Hans] Wierix (Antwerp 1549-c. 1618 Brussels); Wierix has altered Bruegel's background, introducing, to the left, the windmill visible in the present work and, to the right, a wagon being attacked by robbers. It was traditionally thought that the engraving derived from a drawing with the same differences (formerly Amiens, Jean Masson collection) given to Pieter I; however Ertz, loc. cit., rejected the traditional attribution of the drawing, suggesting instead that it is a work of Pieter II, taken from the engraving. The ostensible subject is explained in two inscriptions, on the prototype and the engraving. On the prototype is written 'Om dat der Welt is soe ongetru Daer om gha ic in den ru [Because the world is so faithless, I shall go into mourning from it]'; whilst around the engraving is inscribed 'De sulck draecht rou; Om dat de weerelt is onghetrou, Die meeste ghebruycken minst recht en reden, Weynich leefter nou; Also hy leven sou, Men rooft men treckt elck streeckt vol gheveusde seden [He is in mourning because the world is so faithless, Most people do not in the least keep to right and reason, Today few live, like they ought to live they rob, they steal and everyone is full of wicked ways].' But one may wonder why the monk, or hermit, is in possession of a full money bag at all; clearly anyone in such a calling should have renounced his worldly goods. The inferral is that the misanthrope himself is no better than the people he so loftily denounces and is in fact worse, being additionally laden with hypocrisy. Therein lies the explanation for the thief's happy countenance - schadenfreude as he steals from one who, proudly revelling in his own unwitting hypocrisy, happily ignores the plight of another man being attacked beyond. The addition of a robbery in the background was, as mentioned above, an introduction of Wierix's, designed to underscore Bruegel's moral. The earliest of Pieter II's versions of the subject (Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten; location unknown, formerly Prince Albrecht von Preussen, see K. Ertz, op. cit., p. 191, no. E26, fig. 20; and that formerly with the Brod Gallery, for which see ibid., no. E28, fig. 21) all employ in the background that from Pieter I's Nest Robber (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum). Only in the three later versions (the present work and two of unknown location, for which see ibid., nos. 30-1) does the design include a background that is closer to the engraving. The character of Pieter Brueghel II's artistic output has recently been examined in depth in the Breughel Enterprises exhibition (Maastricht and Brussels, 2001-2). It is known that he employed a studio of at least nine pupils as well as his own son, Pieter III. The exhibition has shown, however, that the degree of studio involvement, and the manner in which it is employed, remains a barely researched field. This is reflected in Ertz's catalogue raisonn‚, in which he accepts the present work as autograph ('eigenhandig'), but notes, not having seen it in the original, the likelihood of studio participation in this and at least two others of this type. Given Brueghel's output, and the nature of his studio assistance, such a degree of caution is responsible, but cannot necessarily be taken as significant in that the painting itself has not been physically examined. It is interesting that the original inscription of Bruegel's prototype is written in faded paint on the reverse of the present picture. This might indicate that, if as has been suggested (for example, D. Allart, 'Did Pieter Brueghel the Younger See his Father's Paintings?', in the cataogue of the exhibition, op. cit., 2001-2, pp. 55-6) Pieter II worked from drawings left behind by his father, then such a work existed for the present composition, recording the father's original inscription, and it was from this that the engraving, Pieter II's drawings and his paintings derive. Such a view is strengthened by the fact that the painted prototype was in the collection of Count Mosi in Parma by the beginning of the seventeenth century, and could well have been in Italy for some time before then. It is known that many of these roundels were originally designed as plates, with the motto painted on the rim, which acted as an integral frame. Whether or not such was the case with Bruegel's original of the present composition is unknown, but the existence of the verses around the engraving suggest that it may have been so. In addition, in the background of the engraving is included a French translation of Bruegel's own surviving inscription. It seems possible, therefore, if a drawn prototype existed, that it too bore that inscription, from which that on the engraving (subsequently translated) and on the present work were taken.
The Wedding Dance with signature 'P.BRE..GHEL.' (lower left) oil on panel 16 x 211/4 in. (40.5 x 53.9 cm.) PROVENANCE Th. Beullekens; sale, Breckpot, Antwerp, 4-5 November 1935, lot 52, where purchased for Bfr 26,000 by Marie-Th‚rŠse van der Mensbrugge on behalf of her brother, Dr. Frans Heulens, by whom privately sold on 3 November 1941 for Bfr 120,000 to Walter Paech, Amsterdam, from whom inherited in 1954 by the present owner, the son of W. Paech. LITERATURE G. Marlier, Pierre Brueghel le Jeune, Brussels, 1969, p. 190, no. 12, as unsigned. K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, 2000, II, p. 725, listed twice under nos. E932 and E933, illustrated p. 726, incorrectly suggesting under no. E933 that it was in the Beullekens collection in 1945 (see provenance, above). NOTES The composition, described by Marlier as 'un des plus populaires de toute le peinture flamande au d‚but du XVII e siŠcle', is one of a group by Brueghel representing different episodes during a wedding day, generally regarded as amongst the high points of the artist's oeuvre. The group's popularity can be understood through its combination of landscape and genre with Brueghel's familiar pathos-imbued depiction of bawdiness in seventeenth-century Flemish life. Like many of Pieter II's works, these are part of a tradition largely established by his father, Pieter Bruegel I - most notably the famous Wedding Banquet in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. The present composition derives from another, probably lost, drawing or painting by Pieter Bruegel I, known from an engraving by Pieter van der Heyden that was published by Hieronymus Cock; a derivation from the same source is also known by Jan Brueghel I (Bordeaux, Mus‚e des Beaux-Arts). The earliest known paintings of this subject by Pieter II are those in the Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, and the Mus‚es Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, both of which are signed and dated 1607; other versions are known with dates continuing until 1626. Pieter II's works of this type can be divided into two groups: those painted in the same sense as Van der Heyden's engraving, and those in reverse. The present picture, together with the majority of autograph versions, belongs to the latter group, believed to derive directly from his father's lost work rather than from the engraving. It has been suggested that Pieter I's original is the painting in the Detroit Institute of Arts, dated 1566. Accepted in full in the past, the question of that painting's authenticity has recently been re-examined. Ertz, in his monograph on Pieter II ( op. cit. ), notes that in his opinion it is either an original Pieter Bruegel I or a contemporary copy of a lost work. Either way, were it the original for the composition, both brothers, although retaining many of the motifs of their father's work, adapted the source for their own designs. The most striking differences are that in the Detroit picture the bride has mingled with the dancing guests, whilst in the sons' works she sits in the background before a canopy with, before her, a plate of coins given as wedding gifts; also the number of people depicted has been reduced, increasing the extent of the landscape background. These differences and omissions are important enough to make it unlikely that the Detroit picture served as the model for the sons' works, and that instead the prototype remains unknown. Because it was the subject of a sale in 1941 in occupied Belgium the present work is included in both the Repertoire des oeuvres d'art dont la Belgique a ‚t‚ spoli‚e durant la guerre 1939-1945 (9 [23]) and the Missing Art Works of Belgium (Part II, 1994, p. 17, no. 14) drawn up by the Belgian state. However recent research has established the full provenance of the picture between 1935 and 2002 and there is no suggestion in the provenance that the painting has at any stage been subject to any forced sale or theft.
Peasants brawling sined and dated ' p.BREUGHEL. 1619' (lower left) oil on panel 283/4 x 401/2 in. (73 x 103 cm.) PROVENANCE Comte Cornet de Ways Ruart de Vaneck, Brussels. Etienne LeRoy, Brussels, 1871. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, no. 7125, by 1931; Sotheby's, New York, 19 January 1984, lot 130. with Colnaghi, London, 1985. Anon. Sale, Sotheby's, London, 10 December 1986, lot 55 (acquired by the subsequent vendor). Anon. Sale, Christie's, New York, 29 January 1999, lot 76 (acquired by the present owner). LITERATURE B. Burroughs, Catalogue of Paintings (Metropolitan Museum of Art), 1931, p. 37. H.B. Mehle and M.M. Salinger, A Catalogue of Early Flemish, Dutch and German Paintings, 1947, pp. 160-1, illustrated. J.L. Allen and E.E. Gardner, A Concise Catalogue of the European Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1954, p. 14. G. Marlier, Pierre Brueghel le Jeune, 1969, p. 271, p. 267, no. 4, fig. 158. R. Hughes and P. Bianconi, Complete Paintings of Brueghel, 1978, p. 114. K. Baetjer, European Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980, I, p. 21; III, p. 365, illustrated. R. Genaille, '"Naer den ouden Brueghel". Le rixe de paysans', Jaarboek van het Koninklijke Museum voor Schone Kunsten te Antwerpen, 1980, pp. 95-6. K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, Lingen, 2000, II, pp. 766-8 and 787, no. 1055, fig. 610. EXHIBITION New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Taste of the Seventies, April 1946, p. 37. NOTES The composition derives from the work of Pieter Bruegel I and was described by Hulin de Loo in 1907 as 'un des groupes les plus complexes, les plus vivants, les plus violents et les plus r‚alistes et en mˆme temps les plus plastiques dont l'histoire de l'art nous fournisse l'exemple... Bruegel a atteint ici l'apog‚e de son art'. The monumental scale of the figures recall those in such works as the Peasant Dance and Wedding Feast in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, and the composition may thus be tentatively dated towards the end of Bruegel's career. Although no surviving prototype for this composition by Bruegel is known, his authorship is universally accepted, and can be inferred from various early sources. Firstly, the composition is known from an engraving by Lucas Vorsterman of circa 1620, which bears the inscription 'Peter Bruegel inven.' In addition (besides a few entries in seventeenth-century inventories which cannot necessarily be taken as accurate) Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, wrote in 1625 to his agent in Antwerp, Lionel Wake: 'I do therefore earnesthic desire you that you would receive for me a peace of a painting begunne by Brugles and finished by Mostard; being a squabbling of clownes fallen out at Cardes, w[hi]ch is in stampe by Mr. Vorstermann' (see M. Hervey, The Life, Correspondence and Collections of Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel, Cambridge, 1921, p. 301). The Arundel picture is again mentioned in the will of Lady Arundel, who died in Amsterdam in 1655, as 'BRVEGEL Contadini che si batteno.' Also, in the in the Sp‚cification des peintures trouv‚es … la maison mortuaire de feu Pierre Paul Rubens, chevalier, 1640 is included as no. 142 a painting by Rubens described as Un combat des paysans, faict aprŠs un dessein du vieuc Bruegel. A sketch in the Museum Boijmans-Van Beuningen, Rotterdam, has been proposed as that work. Because of the similarity between the figure types in the Rotterdam sketch and the Vortserman engraving, it has long been argued that Vorsterman took the former as the model for his own work. In addition, the dedication on the engraving to Jan Brueghel I has led many, including Marlier, to hypothesize that the lost original was in Jan's possession until his death in 1625. The latter theory was thought to have been supported by the existence of two versions by Jan I (that formerly in the Gem„ldegalerie, Dresden, and that in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna); however, their attributions have been rejected or questioned by Klaus Ertz (that of the Dresden picture cannot be secured, as the picture was destroyed in World War II and is thus known only from photographs). In addition, scholars have proposed the existence of a collaborative work by Jan I and Rubens. Various pictures have been proposed for this, including most recently one in a Belgian private collection (see the catalogue of the exhibition, De Bruegel … Rubens, p. 171, under no. 73). This theory has, however, also been questioned by Klaus Ertz ( op. cit., 1988, p. 772), who regards all such works as by Jan II in the 1630s or '40s. Assuming that Ertz is correct in his revisions, only circumstantial evidence remains that Pieter I's original was owned by Jan I. The specific details given in the Arundel letter do suggest that the painting did exist, and the fact that it was finished by Gillis Mostaert could reflect the fact, as discussed above, that Pieter I's work was from late in his career - maybe even left incomplete at his death, in which case it would be plausible that either of his sons inherited it. That Arundel's letter was written shortly after Jan I's death could, of course, be nothing more than coincidence. Jan's ownership has also been inferred from the dedication of Vorsterman's engraving: 'Clariss. Praestantissimoq. viro D¤o Ionni Bruegelio, Petri Bruegelii sui temporis Apellis Filio, Paternae Artis haeredi ex asse, hoc patriae manus monumentum artificiosissimum L.M.Q.D.D. Lucas Vorsterman excud. cum privil.' The last link with Jan I is the Rubens inventory and the Rotterdam sketch, which, if it remains accepted as an autograph work, would imply that the latter artist had access to the work, an obvious possibility if it was owned by one of his closest friends and artistic collaborators. Ultimately, however, the question of Bruegel's original remains open, as does the problem of Rubens' and Jan I's involvements in the composition, so it may also never be possible to tell whether Pieter II had access to his father's work. In the continuing absence of a version by Jan I, however, that would seem to be the most logical case, especially as of the eight versions accepted by Ertz as by Pieter II (including the present painting), all are in the opposite sense to Vosterman's engraving. Of those, the earliest is dated 1610 (Belgium, private collection; formerly Brussels, Copp‚e collection) and the latest 1622 (Prague, Nationalgalerie). The present work, dated earlier than any other than the Copp‚e picture was described by Marlier ( loc. cit. ) thus: 'La qualit‚ est excellente et la facture parait plus soign‚e'.
To fill the well once the calf has fallen in oil on panel, circular 73/4 in. (19.6 cm.) diam. NOTES The composition is one of two types associated with Pieter Brueghel II and his workshop, of which Klaus Ertz ( Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, I, Lingen, 2000, pp. 202-3, nos. E80-3) lists five autograph examples. These are split between two types: those in which the farmer fills in the well with earth from a basket, and the present type in which a spade is used. This latter composition derives in reverse from the relevant figures in Pieter Bruegel I's Netherlandish Proverbs (Berlin, Staatiche Museen, Gem„ldegalerie). The subject of the painting is the proverb ' De put dempen als 't kalf verdronken is ', of which the English equivalent is 'To shut the stable door after the horse has bolted'. Beneath the roundel in the relevant plate from the series of proverbs in the Museum Mayer van den Bergh, Antwerp, attributed by some scholars to Pieter I but regarded by Beck as being early copies, the tag is expanded to: Wat haet het sien en derelyck loncken, ick stop den put als tcalf is verdroncken.'.
Autumn oil on panel 161/2 x 221/2 in. (41.9 x 57 cm.) PROVENANCE with Galerie de Jonckheere, Paris, 1977. LITERATURE K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, Lingen, 1988/2000, II, p. 599, no. E655, illustrated, as Pieter Brueghel II. NOTES Accepted by Klaus Ertz, loc. cit., as an autograph work by Pieter Brueghel II, this painting derives from a design by Hans Bol. In 1570, a year after the death of Pieter Bruegel the Elder, Hieronymus Cock published a popular series of engravings depicting the four seasons. Although the first two designs in the series were provided by Bruegel, the remaining two seasons, Autumn and Winter, were not delivered before his death, and were instead executed by Bol. This series was to serve as the model for many subsequent artists, most notably Abel Grimmer and Pieter Brueghel II, who, as Ertz notes ( op. cit., p. 570) became from circa 1616 particularly interested in the subject of the seasons. Unlike Grimmer, whose depictions of Autumn remained consistently close to the engraving, Pieter II adapted Bol's design, inserting motifs from his father's paintings. For example, the group including the butcher bending over the pig is based on The Census at Bethlehem (Mus‚es Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels) while the addition of magpies on the far right of pays homage to The Mapgie on the Gallows (Hessisches Landesmuseum, Darmstadt).
A winter townscene with skaters on a frozen river by a bird trap, a view of Antwerp beyond indistinctly signed 'P.BREVG...' (lower right) oil on panel 14 7/8 x 21 5/8 in. (37.8 x 54.9 cm.) PROVENANCE with Robert Lebel, Paris, 1935. with E. Slatter, London, before 1944. Percy B. Meyer, 28 July 1944. LITERATURE G. Marlier, Pierre Brueghel le Jeune, Brussels, 1969, p. 245, no. 35. K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jngere, 1988-2000, II, p. 624, no. F761 (see note, below). EXHIBITION Bedford, Cecil Higgins Art Gallery and Museum, 1995-2000, on loan. NOTES The composition of this picture is one of the most enduringly popular of the Brueghel family. The prototype is often thought to be the painting in the Mus‚es Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels; however, as Klaus Ertz points out in his recent monograph on Pieter Brueghel II ( op. cit., p. 576), the attribution of that work to Pieter Bruegel the Elder, whose signature and date it bears, is not beyond dispute. He believes, instead, that the prototype may be a lost work by Jan Brueghel I, inspired by his father's famous Hunters in the Snow of 1565 (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum). The distinctive beauty of the composition derives from the introduction of the unusual bird trap theme above the view of villagers at play on the ice - a scene inspired by that in the middle ground of the Hunters in the Snow. Ertz describes it as a simple, genre-like landscape; however this to a degree underestimates the inventiveness and originality displayed in the as-yet-unidentified protoype. It has been suggested that the underlying subject of the picture is the precariousness of life, with the obliviousness of the birds towards the threat of the trap mirrored by the carefree play of the skaters upon the fragile ice. In the catalogue of the exhibition Le SiŠcle de Brueghel (Brussels, Mus‚es Royaux des Beaux-Arts, 27 September-24 November 1963, p. 69) Georges Marlier identified the village depicted as Pede-Ste-Anne in Brabant. The attribution of the present picture to Pieter Brueghel II was accepted by Dr. Friedl„nder, formerly of the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Dr. Gratama of the Frans Halsmuseum and Marlier ( loc. cit. ). Klaus Ertz listed it in his monograph ( loc. cit. ) under questionable pictures as no. F671; Dr. Ertz's opinion was, however, provisional, having not seen the picture. It was shown to him in person on 14 March 2001, and he has subsequently accepted the picture in full, regarding it as 'a top quality picture of the Bird Trap theme by Pieter Brueghel the Younger, on the level of the best museum pieces... The signature bottom right I read as "P.BREVG...", indicating a secure dating to after 1616.'.
