12. The Influence of Dutch Artists in Naples and Sicily

We have seen a steady stream of Dutch artists file past us on their way to Rome over the course of a century. As we said at the beginning, Rome may have been the chief destination of the artists journeying to Italy but that does not mean we can afford to ignore the other parts of the country they went to. Sometimes it is far from easy to pin the itinerant Dutchmen down to one ‘main working place’. That is particularly true of the landscape draughtsmen. Jan Hackaert, for example, was in Urbino and Fossombrone, in the Appenines, at Lake Trasimeno, in Perugia, Assisi, Tivoli and Sorrento. Daniel Schellinks travelled all over Italy, venturing as far as Sicily and Malta even, while Vincent Laurentsz van der Vinne only got as far as Genoa and Gerard ter Borch I and Dirck Helmbreeker ended up in Naples. 330 However, it was not just the landscape painters who led an irregular life. Leonaert Bramer reputedly (according to de Bie) saw a great deal of Italy,331 to say nothing of Hendrik Cornelisz Vroom and Mulier-Tempesta with their zest for adventure.

Let us start by following the trail of the Dutch in the south of Italy, in Naples and Sicily, two areas with a comparable artistic culture which developed following their integration into the Spanish Empire. We noted earlier that Matthias Stom(er), one of Honthorst’s pupils, followed in the footsteps of his revered model Caravaggio and went to Naples and Messina. Honthorst might even have made paintings for art lovers in Naples,332 and a long-standing tradition has it that Hendrick ter Brugghen was active in the city.333 At all events, his veneration for Caravaggio appears to have been appreciated there.334 Thanks to the Spaniard, Jusepe de Ribera (1591-1652), this tendency seems to have found a distinctly Romantic, painterly form of expression with strong light-and-dark contrasts which involuntarily give it an Rembrandtesque feel [i].335 ‘Rembrandt-like half-length portraits’ were also a feature of Luca Giordano’s (1634-1705) work, although he clearly had a closer affinity to Rubens, who was well known in Naples [i][i][i].336 Giovanni Battista Caracciolo (1578-1635) [i],337 on the other hand, was more restrained and reserved in his interpretation of Caravaggism, which underwent further refinement at the hands of Bernardo Cavallino (1616-1656) [i].338 But even from the direction in which these artists moved tenuous links can be established with the Dutch followers of Caravaggio.

Jusepe de Ribera  
Euclid between 1630-1635
oil paint / canvas, 125.1 x 92.4 cm
location unknown :  Josephe de Ribera español F
The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles/Malibu, no. 2001.26



Luca Giordano  
Self portrait of Luca Giordano (1632-1705) c. 1665
oil paint / canvas, 72,5 x 57,5 cm

Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence, no. 1629



attributed to Luca Giordano   afterRembrandt  
Portrait of Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669) c. 1669 or later
oil paint / canvas, 80 x 61 cm
Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Napels, no. 187



Giovanni Battista Caracciolo  
C hrist in the garden of Gethsemane c. 1615
oil paint / canvas, 148 x 124 cm
lower center :  GBCA
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, no. GG F17



Bernardo Cavallino  
David playing the harp for Saul (1 Samuel 18:10) (1625 - 1656)
oil paint / canvas, 94,5 x 130 cm
Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam, no. St 115



Domenico Gargiulo (also known as Micco Spadaro) (1609-1675) likewise took up an intermediate position in Naples, a city that was exposed to multiple influences.339 For a long time the portrait of a Young Man Smoking, which hangs in Naples Museum, was attributed to Gargiulo, until it proved to be the work of a Dutch Caravaggist instead [i].340 His works have the dark colours and painting style of Michiel Sweerts, but his subject matter is more reminiscent of Bourguignon. The depiction of the Revolution of 1647 in Museo di San Martino in Naples [i] recalls two earlier vedute made by Jacob Isaacsz. van Swanenburg (1561-1638) [i][i].341 Unfortunately these were made in Holland after engravings. Swanenburg spent many years in Naples in the early part of the century. He appears to have had a predilection for painting visions of hell or ‘witches’ sabbaths’. This earned him the displeasure of the Inquisition in 1608 and he was promptly arrested. But why should he not have painted vedute of Naples at that time, the realism of which undoubtedly made a major impression a hundred years before the advent of Van Wittel? From an inventory note we learn that a portraitist by the name of David Baudringien (c. 1581-1650) worked for a while in Naples around 1630, 342 but overall portrait painting in Naples appears to have been more Flemish- than Dutch-influenced.343

possiblyMaster of the Cassel Musicians   or follower of Hendrick ter Brugghen  
Pipe smoker with tobacco container 1620-1650
oil paint / canvas, 65 x 55 cm
Museo Nazionale di San Martino, Napels, no. 84404



Domenico Gargiulo  
Piazza del Mercato during the Revolt of Masaniello c. 1648-1652
oil paint / canvas, 126 x 177 cm
Museo Nazionale di San Martino, Napels, no. 84333



Jacob Isaacsz. van Swanenburg  
View of St. Peter's Square in Rome dated 1628
oil paint / panel, 57,5 x 109 cm
bottom left of the middle :  1628 / IACOMO / SWANEN / BVRGH
SMK - National Gallery of Denmark, Copenhagen, no. 693 (cat. 1951)



Jacob Isaacsz. van Swanenburg  
View of St. Peter's Square in Rome dated 1632
oil paint / panel, 57 x 107 cm
bottom left of the middle :  1632
Städtische Kunstsammlungen Augsburg, Augsburg, no. 2650



Aniello Falcone (1607-1656) can be added to the painters of battle scenes we met earlier in Rome (fig. 49) [i][i].344 His initial focus was on Salvator Rosa but he seems to have responded to the ideas of Dutch artists that were passed on to him via the Bambocciate painters. He may have come into contact with Adriaen Cornelisz van Linschoten (c. 1606/7-1677), an artist from Delft, who must have been in Naples in the early 1630s.345 The only works of his we are familiar with are two mezzotints by Verkolje after two Apostles’ heads in the style of Jusepe de Ribera [i][i]. He cannot possibly have seen the battle scenes by Cornelis Verhuyck, which were sent from Rome to Naples and other places.

Andrea de  Leone (1610-1685)  
Battle scene (1630 - 1685)
oil paint / canvas, ? x ? cm
Frederick  Haussmann (Fritz), Berlin



Aniello Falcone  
Battle Scene 1630s
oil paint / canvas, 104 x 130 cm
Nationalmuseum Stockholm, Stockholm, no. NM 791



Nicolaas Verkolje   after Adriaen Cornelisz. van Linschoten  
Paul the Apostle (1688 - 1746)
mezzotint / paper, 260 x 178 mm
lower left :  Linschoten pinx.
lower right :  N. Verkolje fec. et exc.
Rijksprentenkabinet, Amsterdam, no. RP-P-OB-17.572



Nicolaas Verkolje   after Adriaen Cornelisz. van Linschoten  
Penitent Saint Peter (1688 - 1746)
mezzotint / paper, 260 x 178 mm
lower center :  St. Petrus
lower left :  Linschoten pinx.
lower right :  Verkolje fec. et exc.
Rijksprentenkabinet, Amsterdam, no. RP-P-OB-17.571



A special role in the exchange of Dutch and Italian works of art was played by the art dealer, Gaspar Roomer (1595-1674), a rich Antwerp merchant who settled in Naples.346 His collection enjoyed a certain reputation. It was seen by Joachim von Sandrart, and Giuolio Cesare Capaccio (1550-1634) provided a brief description of it in about 1634.347 Apart from works by Neapolitan painters the collection contained pictures by van Dyck, Bril and Jan Brueghel as well as works by the first generation of ‘Bent’ painters such as Giovanni del Campo, Cornelis Poelenburch, Leonaert Bramer, Franciscus Viruly, Jan Miel, Pieter van Laer, Michelangelo Cerquozzi, Goffredo Wals and David de Haen. De Roomer’s collection also included works by a number of unfamiliar artists. We learn from a different source that he had a dubious reputation.348 The Neapolitans occasionally derived pleasure from painting in the style of a different artist, a practice in which Luca Giordano, for instance, excelled. But de Roomer took things a step further, turning Santafede’s pictures into ‘Titians’ and Giordano’s works into ‘Veroneses’. This resulted in ‘Wouwermans’ which no one would have looked at had they been presented as by Aniello Falcone. The conclusion we can draw here is that this Dutchman’s battle scenes were more highly esteemed than the works of many a Neapolitan artist.

Only a few Dutch landscape artists appear to have settled in Naples.349 Most were quite happy to go on an outing there from Rome in the company of others. Among the few to spend more time in the city were Willem van Bemmel (1630-1708),350 Gaspar van Wittel [i][i],351 the maritime artists Abraham and Jacobus Storck, and Abraham Willaerts (1603/13-1669) [i], all of whom have already crossed our path.352 They were joined by the little-known Paolo Ganses who is said to have painted moonlit seascapes in Naples around 1700.353 The animal painter, Giuseppe Tassoni (1653-1737) [i] may have become acquainted with Berchem’s style, which can be detected in his paintings, through van Bemmel or via some other source.

circle of Caspar van Wittel  
View of the Gulf of Naples (1675 - 1750)
oil paint / copper, 20 x 50,7 x 4,1 cm
G.v.W.
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, no. SK-A-2660



Caspar van Wittel  
The Darsena delle Galere and Castello Nuovo at Naples after 1699
oil paint / canvas, 75,5 x 141 cm
National Maritime Museum (Greenwich), Greenwich (London), no. BHC1900



Abraham Willaerts  
A Spanish three-decker at anchor off Naples dated 1669
oil paint / paper, 86,5 x 54,5 cm
lower center :  [...] F. / 1669
National Maritime Museum (Greenwich), Greenwich (London), no. BHC1899



Giuseppe Tassoni  
Landscape with shepherds and herds dated 1727
oil paint / canvas, 250 x 170 cm
location unknown : 
art dealer



The still-life painters made up a separate group in their own right, although it must be conceded that the Flemings, especially Abraham Brueghel (1631-1697), were of much greater significance than the Dutch artists for the development of this genre [i].354 Not until the 1650s do we find two Dutchmen, Otto Marseus van Schriek (1619/20-1678) and Abraham Cornelisz Begeyn, in Naples.355 In the meantime the two brothers Giovan Battista (1629-1693)356 and Giuseppe Ruoppolo (died 1710)[i] had developed their own style, drawing on Luca Giordano [i] and the Flemish models.

Luca Giordano  
Vegetable garden with vegetables and fruit (1651 - 1705)
oil paint / canvas, ? x ? cm
Private collection



Abraham Brueghel  
Still life of flowers and fruits dated 1677
oil paint / canvas, 127 x 177 cm
lower right :  A. Brugel Fe 1677
Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België, Brussels, no. inv. 6575



Abraham Brueghel   and Giuseppe Ruoppolo  
Still-life with grapes, flowers and birds c. 1675-1680
oil paint / canvas, 253 x 338 cm
Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Napels, no. Q 294



Fish still lifes, which constituted a special variety within the genre, approximated very closely to works by Dutch artists.357 Francisco de Herrera II (1627-1685) became very famous as a fish painter and his still lifes certainly bear comparison with those of Abraham van Beyeren; they have the same smooth and shiny surface with multiple reflections of light.358 Giuseppe Recco (1634-1695) was influenced by Herrera. His compositions appear less elegant and come closer to the style of Jacob Gillig [i]. The same is true of Giovanni Agostino Cassana (c. 1665-1720) who produced sumptuous flower images in the style of Mignon (fig. 50) [i][i].359 Gennaro Crispo, a little-known artist who probably belonged to the Neapolitan school, seems to have worked in the same way [i].360

Gennaro Crispo  
Still life of fish with vegetables (1650 - 1701)
oil paint / canvas, 76 x 103 cm
upper left :  T.R.
lower right : 
Vienna ( E. Hirschler & Comp.), 1903-04-21 - 1903-04-25, no. 21



Giuseppe Recco  
Fish, shells and coral on a rocky shore (1649 - 1695)
oil paint / canvas, 94,2 x 127 cm
lower left :  EQS Recco
London (England) (Christie's), 2011-07-05 - 2011-07-06, no. 49



Giovanni Agostino Cassana  
Flower still life with fruit and a white rabbit (1680 - 1720)
oil paint / canvas, 134,6 x 73,7 cm
London (England) (Sotheby's), 1988-10-20



Giovanni Agostino Cassana  
Still life of fish dated 1704
oil paint / panel, 60 x 74,5 cm
lower right :  A. Cassana 1704
Milaan (Finarte), 1980-04-29, no. 49



As for the poultry scenes by Nicola Maria Recco (active c. 1686-1715) [i] and Domenico Brandi (1684-1736) [i], reference must again be made to Flemish examples for purposes of comparison. Francesco della Cuosta (c. 1639-1723) [i], an artist of whom we know very little, allegedly painted in the style of van Aelst, Weenix and Pieter Boel.361

Domenico Brandi  
Animal painting with guinea pigs and chickens dated 1732
oil paint / canvas, 58 x 79 cm
lower left :  Dom. Brandi P. / Neap. 1732.
London (England) (Christie's), 1997-10-31, no. 95



Francesco della Cuosta  
Still life with grapen and pomegranates (1667 - 1723)
oil paint / canvas, 114 x 89 cm
lower left :  F.co Q
Whereabouts unknown



Dutch art in Sicily begins with two familiar acquaintances, Matthias Stom (c. 1600-after 1645) and his pupil, Joannes van Houbracken (active 1631-1661).362 The paintings by Stomer described in the inventory of the collector Antonio Ruffo and the picture bearing the inscription ‘Stom’ in the church at Caccamo (Palermo) form the starting point for the compilation of Stomer’s / Stom’s painted oeuvre [i].363 Joannes van Houbracken, who was initially taught by Rubens, became a pupil and follower of Stomer in Messina. None of his works have survived [i][i].364 Whether these artists with Dutch names were from the Northern Netherlands is by no means certain. As pupils and successors of Honthorst, however, they have every right to be mentioned here. By the end of the 16th century a Haarlem Mannerist by the name of Simon Wobrck (active 1557-1587) [i]365 was working in Sicily and he was soon followed to the island by a Flemish artist, Abraham Casembroot (c. 1593-1658), who settled in Messina [i].366 His paintings have been lost, but his drawings and etchings give us an idea of his style [i][i].367 His paintings and those of his pupil, Giovanni van den Broecke [Jan-Baptist van den Broeck (died 1665)],368 of whom we know nothing, were included in the collection of Count Ruffo in Messina as early as 1648.369 A large number of drawings from the sketchbook of a trip through Sicily, now in the Berliner Kabinett, have been attributed to Adriaen van der Cabel [i].370 However, since none of the sketches are signed, it is still uncertain whether he did in fact travel to the south.

attributed to Abraham Casembroot  
View on Messina (1623 - 1658)
oil paint / canvas, 53 x 122 cm
Museo Regionale di Messina (Messina), Messina, no. A 282



Abraham Casembroot  
Ships in a Mediterranean harbour: half sunken ship is caulked (1608 - 1658)
oil paint / copper, 13,1 x 20 cm
lower left :  AB. C. F.
New York City (Sotheby's), 2012-01-26, no. 236



Abraham Casembroot  
Ships in a Mediterranian harbour: right ship with Dutch flag (1608 - 1658)
oil paint / copper, 13,1 x 20 cm
lower left :  AB. C
New York City (Sotheby's), 2012-01-26, no. 236



Matthias Stom  
Saint Isidore creates a fountain with his spade dated 1641
oil paint / canvas, 347 x 253 cm
lower left :  Matthias Stom / F. A° 1641
Duomo di San Giorgio martire (Caccamo), Caccamo



Joannes van Houbracken  
Discovery of the bodies of St. Placidus and company dated 163[5 or 6]
oil paint / canvas, 314 x 223 cm
lower right :  Joanne Van Houbracken Flandriae inv. et Faciebat 1635
Museo regionale interdisciplinare di Messina (Messina), Messina, no. 1170



Joannes van Houbracken  
Crucifixion with May, John and Mary Magdalene dated 1657
oil paint / canvas, 426 x 320 cm
bottom (positional attribute) :  IOANNES HDUBRAKEN ANTVERPIAE PINSEBAT.1657
topside, in the middle :  IESVS NAZA. RENVS REX VDEORVM
Basilica minore di Santa Maria Assunta (Randazzo), Randazzo



attributed to Simon Wobreck  
Circumsision of Christ dated 1580
oil paint / panel, 238 x 175 cm
San Domenico (Castelvetrano), Castelvetrano



Abraham Casembroot  
View of Messina with the Messina Cathedral, top right Palazzata under construction 1622-1625
pen in brown ink / paper, 134 x 199 mm
Kupferstichkabinett der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Berlin, no. KdZ 12607



Antonio Ruffo (1610-1678) was an art collector of great taste and considerable erudition.371 His inventory of 1648 lists not only 169 paintings but also frescoes, coins and other precious items. In addition to the paintings mentioned above the collection included early Netherlandish paintings. Three pictures were acquired from a ‘Giovanni Olandese’ in Rome in 1648.372 Abraham Brueghel, who was likewise active as an art dealer, received a major commission the same year. The Netherlandish art dealer, Cornelis de Wael, supplied various Italian paintings at some later date. Now that one of the collector’s descendants has discovered and published letters and invoices from various artists we know that Ruffo’s collection also boasted three Rembrandts. In 1652, Ruffo ordered a Philosopher from Rembrandt which was completed the following year and dispatched to Messina in 1654. This philosopher is the Aristotle that is now in an American collection [i].373 Ruffo required two companion pieces for the philosopher. Guercino was commissioned to deliver a Cosmographer and Mattia Preti a Dionysus. Guercino felt greatly honoured by the commission he received. He painted the companion piece in his broad manner and requested a sketch of the Rembrandt painting, apparently so as to adapt it to the original. He wrote saying he was familiar with Rembrandt’s etchings and greatly admired them.374 Ruffo must have been very satisfied with the first commission, for in 1661 he ordered an Alexander and in 1662 a Homer. In 1669, finally, he acquired a further 189 etchings which were handpicked and dispatched by the artist himself. Difficulties arose, however, with the delivery of the Alexander and the Homer. Ruffo complained that the Homer was too big and that the Alexander was painted on two pieces of canvas sown together. Rembrandt apparently remedied the defects to the satisfaction of his client, though, otherwise he would not have received a final commission. Within the space of just a few years, then, Ruffo had in his possession three of Rembrandt’s most eminent late works. Regrettably, the Homer was severely damaged by fire, although the central figure remained unscathed (Dr. A. Bredius Collection, on loan to the Mauritshuis in The Hague) [i], and the Alexander has been lost, unless he can be deemed the subject of a work by Rembrandt dating to 1655 (sic!) which is now in Glasgow [i].375 From a letter written by Mattia Preti in 1665 we learn that Rembrandt’s works were greatly admired by Roman and Neapolitan artists such as Ciro Ferri, Carlo Maratti, Salvator Rosa and Giacinto Brandi.376 In Messina there was an opportunity to study Rembrandt’s late works in detail, but Ruffo’s collection does not appear to have been well known in Italy. The Florentine art writer, Filippo Baldinucci, who wrote at length about Rembrandt in 1685, knew nothing of the Rembrandt collection in Messina.

Rembrandt  
Aristotle with a bust of Homer dated 1653
oil paint / canvas, 143,5 x 136,5 cm
lower left :  Rembrandt. f. / 1653.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, no. 61.198



Rembrandt  
Homer dated 1663
oil paint / canvas, 107 x 82 cm
lower left :  [Rembr]andt. f 1663
Koninklijk Kabinet van Schilderijen Mauritshuis, The Hague, no. 584



Rembrandt  
Man in armour dated 1655
oil paint / canvas, 137,5 x 104,4 cm
lower left :  Rembrandt f / 1655
Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow (Scotland), no. 601



Footnotes

330 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] As has been stated above, it is now generally assumed that Jan Hackaert never traveled on from Switzerland to Italy; Houbraken mentions that van de Vinne was in Geneva, not Genoa. As far as is known, Van der Vinne never travelled to Italy (see also note 255 xxx).

331 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Compare note 158.

332 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] As far as we know paintings by Honthorst did not reach Naples until the late 18th century. The absence in 17th-century Naples of his works was surely to the advantage of Matthias Stom, who specialized in night scenes with sophisticated light effects (Van Der Sman 2016A, p. 112).

333 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] See note xxx for the dismissal of this hypothesis

334 [Gerson 1942/1873] See p. 144 [§ 4]. Von Schneider expresses it like this (in translation): ‘Painting in Naples in the 1630s seems to have been anticipated in The parable of the rich man and poor Lazarus by ter Brugghen of 1625 (art dealer Otlet, 1922)’ (Von Schneider 1933, p. 38) [RKDimages 105477].

335 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On the possible impact of Ribera’s art on Rembrandt: Sluijter 2015, p. 46-51.

336 [Gerson 1942/1983] Rolfs 1910, p. 343. About Netherlandish artists in Naples: Rolfs 1910, chapter 37, p. 239-249. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] An old copy after Rembrandt’s Self-portrait in the Uffizi (illustrated here) in the Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte in Naples, is attributed to Luca Giordano. He could have painted the work after 1669 in Florence. A free copy after Rembrandt’s young self-portrait (RKDimages 2943 or 29498) is listed as a work by Giordano in the Galleria Sabauda in Turin, inv.no. 687 (RKDimages 296144). On works by (and after) Rubens in Neapolitan collections: Denunzio 2018-2019.

337 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Caracciolo: Bologna et al. 1991.

338 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Cavallino: Spinosa 2013.

339 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Gargiulo: Daprà et al. 2002.

340 [ Gerson 1942/1983] Longhi 1927, p. 116; Von Schneider 1933, p. 39, note 28. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] As is clear from the record in RKDimages 241166 (illustrated here), the attribution of this painting has been under discussion ever since.

341 [Gerson 1942/1983] View of St. Peter's Square in Rome, Copenhagen, no. 194, signed and dated 1628. Repetition in the Augsburg Museum (Frimmel 1906). An inventory in Leiden in 1641 comprised a painting ‘Napels in ‘t verschiet’ [Napels in the distance] (by Jacob van Swanenburgh?). [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The painting by Gargiulo, also known as the Revolt of Masaniello, is the property of Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte but on permanent display in Museo di San Martino since 1922.

342 [Gerson 1942/1983] Orlers 1641, p. 369-370. Compare Van Regteren Altena 1936, p. 34, 114. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Porzio/Van der Sman 2018-2019, p. 54-55.

343 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] In the first decade of the 17th century the Dutch painter Abraham Vinck (1574/5-1619) stood out as one of the most prominent portrait painters active in Naples. Archival records show that between 1600 and 1608 he received commissions from highly placed patrons (Osnabrugge 2015, p. 61-67, 180-186), but unfortunately no works from these years have yet been traced. In a letter from the art dealer Giacomo de Castro to Antonio Ruffo, dated 1673, Vinck is still recorded as a famous portrait painter ‘che fu qui a Napoli et era fiamengo’ and as a very close friend of Caravaggio (‘amicissimo di Caravaggio’) (Ibid., p. 64). Nowadays, Abraham Vinck is principally known for having owned two paintings by Caravaggio together with his Flemish colleague and business partner Louis Finson (before 1580-1617): the Virgin of the Rosary now in Vienna (RKDimages 292666) and a painting of Judith and Holofernes which some scholars believe to be identical with the rather poorly executed work that was recently put on sale in Toulouse (Labarbe et al. 2019). Vinck may have taken the two paintings with him on his return to Amsterdam around 1609. Osnabrugge 2015, p. 61, believes that Abraham Vinck briefly returned to in Naples in 1615 and again between 1617 and 1618, but Porzio 2013, p. 62 note 6, points out that another painter named Abraham Vinck (or Vinx), of somewhat younger age, seems to have worked in Naples in the second decade of the 17th century. This painter left his signature on an altarpiece that is kept in the Seminario Arcivescovile in Aversa (Leone de Castris 1991, p. 97, ill., p. 101 note 12).

344 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The battle scene selected by Bert Meijer for the 1983 edition as fig. 49 is now firmly attributed to Andrea de Leone (1610-1695). On Falcone: Della Ragione 2008.

345 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Compare Houbraken 1718/1721, vol. 1, p. 145: ‘some people think that he was a pupil of Spanjolet. Montias 1982, p. 164, endorses Houbraken’s account, and places his return in Delft around 1635.

346 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Roomer: Ruotolo 1982; Osnabrugge 2015, p. 108-109; Porzio-Van der Sman 2018-2019, p. 51-54.

347 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Capaccio 1634, p. 865-865.

348 [Gerson 1942/1983] Vaes 1925, p. 184; Rolfs 1910, p. 7, following C.T. Delbono, Ritorni sull’arte napoletana, 1878.

349 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Johannes Lingelbach’s and Philips le Petit’s stay in Naples: Porzio/Van der Sman 2018-2019, p. 56-57.

350 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] No written or visual evidence has yet been found that supports Johann Gabriel Doppelmayr’s brief account of van Bemmel’s sojourn in Naples (1730). See Eiermann 2007, p. 16, 22. On van Bemmel’s activity in Germany: Gerson/Van Leeuwen et al. 2017-2018, esp. § 5.7.

351 [Gerson 1942/1983] Caspar van Wittel’s views of Naples (of 1765) [sic] in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, in Greenwich, etc. Also Willem van Ingen (see above) was in Naples. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] For van Ingen’s alleged visit to Naples see Houbraken 1718/1721, vol. 3, p. 317.

352 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] See § 9. A trip to Rome in 1659-1660 is first mentioned by Von Wurzbach (Von Wurzbach 1906-1911, vol. 2, p. 88); it is unclear on which source this information is based. A visit to Naples, however, is not mentioned anywhere in the literature; the illustrated painting is traditionally called the harbor of Naples, but the representation is clearly not based on autopsy.

353 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Bernardo De’ Dominici states that he studied with ‘monsù Paolo Ganses’, who specialized in ‘marine a lume di luna’ (De Dominici 1840-1846, vol. 4, p. 385 ff). No works by Ganses have yet been traced.

354 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Trezzani in Bocchi/Bocchi 2004, p. 117-147.

355 [Gerson 1942/1983] Both were in Napels in the 1650s. Two still lifes in the Spada Museum (as Flemish school) could be by a Neapolitan pupil of Marseus, according to Fokker (Fokker 1932). Two others, which are given to P.A. Barbieri by the Galleria d’Arte Antica (nos. 344/5), are according to Hoogewerff by Abraham Begeyn (Hoogewerff 1922, Hoogewerff 1924). [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Gerson’s hypothesis is not corroborated by any archival or visual sources. The Neapolitan painter of sottoboschi Paolo Porpora (1617/9-1673), whose works are clearly inspired by those of Marseus, had the opportunity to meet the Dutchman in Rome between 1650 and 1655.

356 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] A painting Gerson probably had in mind as a work of Giovan Battista Ruoppolo is now attributed to Giuseppe Recco (RKDimages 295743).

357 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] There appear to be no direct links between the development of the fish still life in the Northern Netherlands and that in Naples. Dutch still lifes are not recorded in the unpublished inventory of the collection of Gaspar Roomer, nor in any other Neapolitan collection of the time.

358 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Herrera: Bocchi/Bocchi 2004, p. 13-21. Although Herrera was praised for his fish still-lifes and even named ‘lo Spagnolo degli pesci’, very few paintings that include depictions of fish can be given to him with certainty. Herrera seems to have created a niche for himself on the Roman art market with the depiction of subjects ‘followed only by some excellent artist in Naples’ (Ibid., p. 15)

359 [Gerson 1942/1983] Signed and 1704 dated works on the Amsterdam art market c. 1937. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Mainly scenes with poultry and vegetables; many images in the online catalogue of Fondazione Zeri.

360 [Gerson 1942/1983] Signed painting in auction Vienna, 21 April 1903, no. 21.

361 [Gerson 1942/1983] See Hoogewerff 1924. For other still-life painters in the Flemish manner: Naples 1938.

362 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Stom and Houbracken, see above, § 3, passim and note 94 (Houbracken). On Stom in Sicily: Zalapi 1997; De Luca 2018; Van der Sman forthcoming. On Netherlandish art in Sicily: Abbate et al. 2018.

363 [Gerson 1942/1983] On the collection Ruffo, see below.

364 [Gerson 1942/1983] Fokker 1931, p. 9-10. There was a painting of a rocky landscape with cave, signed and dated ‘v. Braek f. 1639’ in the auction A. Schwarz in Cologne, 10 June 1931, no. 28. A painting of 1635 by Joannes van Houbracken is in the Museum in Messina (Fokker 1929, p. 3). [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] As to the first painting mentioned by Gerson: no images in the auction catalogue of 10 June 1931. Given the subject, it might concern the Flemish painter Giovanni Battista Bracco, of whom very little is known (see Meijer/Sluiter/Squellati Brizio 2011, no. 69-71). As to the second painting, see Spagnolo in Abbate et al. 2018, p. 178-183.

365 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Wobreck: Mendola 2018, p. 49-53; Romano in Abbate et al. 2018, p. 160-162.

366 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Casembroot: Beunen 1995.

367 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] For a catalogue of his paintings, drawings and prints, including ‘attributed works’ and rejected attributions, see Beunen 1995, p. 52-61. Beunen mentions four authograph paintings, while she keeps some reserve on the attribution of the Panoramic View of Messina (Messina, Museo Regionale, inv. no. A 282) (illustrated here). Since 2005, two more paintings have been attributed to Casembroot, one of which owned by the Banca d’Italia in Messina (Famà 2007, p. 101-103) and one in a private collection, signed ‘AB.C’ (Campagna Cicala 2018, p. 40-41, ill.).

368 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The only ‘Giovanni van den Broecke’ who was surely connected to Abraham Casembroot, was the Flemish merchant Giovanni Battista van den Broech or van den Brach, who succeeded Casembroot as the Dutch-Flemish consul of Messina in November 1658 (Gozzano 2014, p. 166). See also note 94 (xxx) on the confusion between the painter Houbracken and the merchant Van den Broeck (Broech).

369 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] For the references to works by Casembroot: Ruffo 1917, p. 13, 18, 24.

370 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] These drawings are now attributed to Abraham Casembrot (Beunen 1995, p. 41-45, 54-56). Only two sheets are still in the possession of the Kupferstich Kabinett in Berlin. In the 1930s most of the drawings were sold. 18 sheets are now part of the collection of the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (donated by Sir Bruce Ingram in 1963).

371 [Gerson 1942/1983] On the collection of Antonio Ruffo: Ruffo 1916; Ricci 1918; Schneider 1918. On the question of the Rembrandt painting in Ruffo’s collection: Hoogewerff 1917D, Hofstede de Groot 1927A, Hofstede de Groot 1929, p. 135, Hoff 1935 (about the question whether Rembrandt could have been in England in the years 1660/6, when he worked for Ruffo). [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Giltaij 1999; Giltaij 2005.

372 [Gerson 1942/1983] Unknown painter.

373 [Gerson 1942/1983] Bredius 1935, no. 478. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] In 1942, Aristotle with the Bust of Homer was still in the collection of the widow of Alfred W. Erickson, New York. It was acquired by the Metropolitan of Art at the sale of her estate in 1961 (New York, Parke-Bernet, November 15, 1961, no. 7).

374 [Gerson 1942/1983] Abraham Brueghel, in contrast, was very disparaging of Rembrandt’s work, which he basically did not understand, like many of his contemporaries.: ‘… quanto alli quadri del Rembrand quali non sono in gran stima …’. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] See also Giltaij 1999, p. 94-96.

375 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] For a more recent summary of this discussion, see RKDimages 53701.

376 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The reference is unclear. Not mentioned in Spike 1998.