Great C17th women artists: Antwerp-Amst

Old masters too’: Ghent exhibition celebrates female artists of the baroque. Show in part a rediscovery of 40+ mostly forgotten women who plied their trade in the Low Countries

Judith Leyster, a Dutch golden age artist, was about 21 when she painted her self-portrait in 1630. In the picture she presented to the world, Leyster exuded sunny confidence. Clad in shimmering silks and a stiffly starched lace collar, she leant back in her chair, holding palette and brushes, a painting by her side. This work, completed in the year she was admitted to a painters’ guild in Haarlem, proclaimed her arrival as an established artist. It was one of the first self-portraits by an artist in the Dutch republic, a device most male painters did not adopt until years later.

Boy and a Girl with a Cat and an Eel, 1635

by Judith Leyster

While celebrated in her lifetime, Leyster was quickly forgotten after her death. A posthumous inventory attributed some of her paintings to the wife of the deceased, referring to her artist husband, Jan Miense Molenaer. Then she disappeared. Her works were attributed to Frans Hals, other male contemporaries, or simply unknown master. Those paintings under her name were little esteemed. In the 1970s a major US museum sold one; other institutions left her work unseen in their vaults. Now the painter, enjoying a revival, is back in the spot-light. She's one of 40+ female artists who worked in the Low Countries in the baroque period featured in this new exhibition

Unforgettable: Women Artists from Antwerp to Amsterdam 1600-1750 opened Mar 2026 at Ghent Museum of Fine Arts/MSK, after the earlier Washington DC exhibition. The MSK exhibition seeks to restore women to one of the most feted eras of art history, best known for works by Rembrandt van Rijn, Johannes Vermeer and Anthony van Dyck. As MSK puts it in its slogan: Old masters were women too.

Curator Frederica Van Dam said the exhibition asked visitors to reflect on “why haven’t we seen many artworks by women before?” The catalogue mentioned 179 women who were active in the art economy of the Low Countries, which corresponded to the modern-day Netherlands, and Flanders in northern Belgium. Many of them were admired in their lifetimes. Still-life paintings by Maria van Oosterwijck, for example, adorned palace walls throughout Europe. 

Still Life with Flowers in a Decorative Vase

Maria van Oosterwijck c1673

In 1697 Russian Tsar Peter I visited the Amsterdam home of Johanna Koerten, a woman who specialised in paper-cutting art on paper, a craft blending drawing, calligraphy and sculpture. Koerten was paid handsomely for her talents: a work of woven silk in a rustic manner made for the Holy Roman Empress was said to earn her more than twice what Rembrandt made for The Night Watch.

 

Gentileschi, Self-Portrait as Saint Catherine of Alexandria,

c1616, National Gall London

Women were written out of the story in the C19th when art history became a discipline. Art historians, who were mainly men, decided what was good art and what was worth writing about. When women did have a walk-on role, they were deemed imitators. That fate befell Rachel Ruysch. Although collectors had long sought her floral stilllifes, admired for their great attention to detail and refined brushstrokes, scholars dismissed her work as derivative. I have seen all her stilllifes, but this self portrait is sublime.

The exhibition is part of growing rediscovery of women who were long absent from art history records, from Italian baroque artist Artemisia Gentileschi (1593-1654) and her near contemporary of Southern Netherlands, Michaelina Wautier, to the Belgian modernist Marthe Donas.

Two Girls as Saint Agnes and Saint Dorothea,

Royal Museum of Fine Arts Antwerp. c1650

 

The C19th was also when painting became the apex of the art museum, over-shadowing the applied arts that women excelled at, such as paper-cutting, calligraphy and lace-making. In the early modern era, lace commanded very high prices, although poorer women, nuns and orphaned girls who usually made the exquisite fans, veils, aprons and tableware earned a pittance. These artists remained anonymous in their lifetimes, signing contemporary records with an “X”.

While many female artists will remain lost to history, some are being re-discovered. The painter Catrina Tieling had been almost entirely forgotten until 2025, when a Dutch art historian reexamined works long attributed to her brother, Lodewijk, and concluded they were in fact signed CT. The exhibition shows Catrina Tieling’s rustic scene of two shepherdesses resting beside a herd of cows, a rare example of an Italianate landscape by a woman.

It also charts some women’s life-changing and unusual decisions. Louise Hollandine converted to Catholicism and entered a convent to maintain her artistic freedom. The daughter of exiled royalty, Hollandine had a gilded childhood in The Hague, becoming a talented portrait painter of friends and family. But she fled her comfortable princess life in 1657 to become a French Benedictine nun, rather than marry her nephew, as her fa-mily wanted. At the convent, she switched to religious genre scenes, although many did not survive the French Revolution. The exhibition shows self-portraits of Hollandine in both lives. In the first, she was cool and poised, fancy in rich silks and a big beribboned hat; in a lat-er work, she made an austere impression, wearing a cross and dressed in a black and white nun’s habit.

Van Dam said art literature needs to see more research into female art-ists and efforts to make their work accessible. Through this exhibition a clear expression of how valuable the works were for the artistic community; it recovered the history of a largely forgotten creative economy in the C17th, when women were vital participants.

Ghent Museum of Fine Arts/MSK

CODART

On 21-22nd May MSK Ghent and the University of Antwerp is running a two-day symposium together with the exhibition Unforgettable. Women artists from Antwerp-Amsterdam The symposium unites art historians, museum professionals and art market experts, sharing their insights on 5 themes: identity, choices, networks, legacy and technique.

Newly authenticated Rembrandt painting!!!

Rijksmuseum researchers recently analysed the Vision of Zacharias in the Temple 1633 and reported it's a Rembrandt van Rijn, painted when he'd moved from Leiden to Amsterdam. The work once rejected as a Rembrandt has now been authenticated, after 2 years of rugged scrutiny.

His vision of Zacharias depicted an account in the Gospel of Luke of the High Priest Zachariah  learning his barren elderly wife Elizabeth would bear a son, the future John the Baptist. Zachariah was captured while performing his Temple duties, reading scripture in front of burning incense, caught unawares. His expression conveyed his surprise as the Archangel Gabriel's news struck him dumb. Zachariah remained mute through the conception and pregnancy, regaining his speech after he agreed their son would be named John. Gabriel was not visible in the painting which only suggested his presence; the angel was unusually represented as radiant light in the upper right corner of the panel. This was an unusual approach at a time when angels were normally depicted as humans with wings. But remember Rembrandt at that time was primarily producing lucrative portraits, not Biblical scenes.

Vision of Zacharias in the Temple 

 by Rembrandt, 1633

Rijksmuseum

In the distant past it was attributed to Rembrandt, and appeared in the first major Dutch exhibition dedicated to him at the Stedelijk Museum in 1898. A 1898 label behind the panel noted the work was exhibited in Sept-Oct as an authentic Rembrandt. But after 1960, specialists decided the work might have been painted by one of Rembrandt’s collaborators such as Jan Lievens, according to Dutch news outlet Het Parool. Without being able to view the work, these claims could not be verified until two years ago.

In 1960, Rembrandt specialists rejected the attribution and the work disappeared. Scholars weren’t permitted to study it until 2 years ago when the owner contacted the museum. The Rijksmuseum unveiled the work and said painstaking analysis and hightech scans had confirmed it was painted by Rembrandt after the young artist moved to Amsterdam. The painting hasn’t been on public display in decades after being bought by a private collector in 1961, a year after it was not called a Rembrandt. Vision of Zacharias was last studied in 1960 when scholars ruled out the possibility that it could be by the Dutch master. Why was the painting excluded from a list of the Dutch master's works in 1960 and why did it disappear after being sold to a private collector in 1961. Although it hasn’t seen publicly since 1961, specialists have recently access to a much wider range of advanced modern analysis techniques.

The work was handed to the museum’s Conservation Dept, which was recently responsible for Operation Night Watch, the museum’s ambitious research & conservation project. As well as traditional stylistic comparisons and signature analysis, the 2-year research project centred around a macro X-ray fluorescence scans. It found traces revealing the composition had been altered, typical of the Dutch Old Master’s painting technique. This deep study of the work, including a scan and comparisons with his other works, confirmed young Rembrandt painted it.

Evidence

The recent 2-year study revealed that all the paints used for the Vision of Zacharias were found in other Rembrandts from the early 1630s. The museum confirmed the authenticity after studying the paints, which fit with those used by Rembrandt during that period. The painting technique and the build-up of paint layers were similar to other early works by Rembrandt, compositional changes that supported the work’s authenticity. The changes made to details while Rembrandt was still painting were analysed; the artist’s signature was applied while the painting was still wet, so it was original. Material analysis, stylistic and thematic similarities, alterations made by Rembrandt, and the overall quality of the painting all support the conclusion that this painting is a genuine work. The very high quality painting had all the hall marks of Rembrandt at the peak of his early career. Rijksmuseum’s director unveiled the painting, on show to the public among their other masterpieces, where it is on long-term loan.

 

Dating analysis of the wooden panel confirmed the wood that was used for the panel on which it was painted was definitely from a tree that was cut down before 1633. The work’s oak panel was dated to c1625-40 by tree-ring dating. A material analysis showed that the paints used were the same as those used in other Rembrandt works from the era. Other factors that support the authentication of this painting include its overall high quality and its thematic parallels with the rest of Rembrandt’s early oeuvre, including Jeremiah Lamenting the Destruction of Jerusalem 1630 and Daniel and Cyrus Before the Idol Bel 1633 

Jeremiah Lamenting the Destruction of Jerusalem 

by Rembrandt 1630 

ArtWay

Zacharias' surprised look was emphasised by light marking the arrival of Gabriel. An in-depth study of the work, including macro X-ray fluorescence scans and comparisons with other works by the artist, confirmed Rembrandt painted it, said the museum’s curator of C17th Dutch paintings, Jonathan Bikker. All the pigments in the painting were used by Rembrandt in other paintings. 

Daniel and Cyrus Before the Idol Bel, 

by Rembrandt van Rijn, 1633 

Getty Museum

The work joined c350 known Rembrandt paintings. See March 2026 issue of the Burlington Magazine. Thanks to Rijksmuseum identifies new Rembrandt painting, 2026

Amsterd Antwerp Sth Africa Brasil N.Y TAviv diamonds

When the Jew­s were expelled from Portugal from 1497, the specialist jewellers and others fled North and ended up in Ant­werp­. Antwerp was still un­der Spanish rule but it had a milder form of the religious opp­res­­sion than that found the Iberian Peninsula. At first, Antwerp seemed a safe place for Jews to settle down and con­tinue their jewell­ery art. Alas religious intolerance reached Antwerp a few years later and another home was needed.

diamonds
displayed by The Diamond Trading Co., Amsterdam

In time the refugees reached the Republic of the Neth­erlands which had rebelled against Spain in the 1570s, won its freedom and gave its citizens considerable freedom. The Netherlands was then the most tolerant country in Europe, so a large part of the Jewish population moved there. With them came the specialist know­ledge and craftsmanship of diamond cutting and polishing.

At the time, Jews and Conversos were creating a trading network that tied together ports in Portugal, Netherlands and Brasil. This network became the chief Dutch commercial circuit in the early C17th and offered support to Jews etc. This circuit enabled Brasilian Conversos to return to Judaism in Am­st­er­dam, and Ams­terdam Jews to establish a port in Brasil. In the process, the Jews of Recife Brasil and in Amst­er­dam remained closely con­n­ect­ed, especially after war closed off acc­ess to the network's Portuguese ports . 

Amsterdam Jews arrived in force in Recife during the 1630s, but travelled back to Amst­er­dam in 1645-54, since the Dutch colony in Brasil was shrinking and event­ually captured by Portuguese troops. Jews had contributed commerc­ially and militarily to this brief colony.

In 1725 diamond fields were discovered in Brasil, and Amst­er­dam gained the monopoly on diamond imports. From then on, Amsterdam became the City of Dia­monds! When the diamond fields of Brasil began to dry up, unempl­oy­ment hit the industry and many diamond cutting/pol­ishing factories went bankrupt. Thankfully diamond supplies were discovered in South Africa. Perfect timing!

Cape Town Diamond Museum
Mapping history of the South African diamond industry back to 1897

After Belgium won independence in 1830 several diamond pol­ish­ers from Amsterdam settled there, maintaining a limited level of market activity. Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe after the pogroms of the early 1880s, a policy of industrial encourage­ment adopted by the Antwerp municipal government and the crisis in Holland brought about a reawakening in the Belgian diamond industry.

In 1890, Dutch King William III approved legislation for the Fair Society for Diamond Trade. Thus the wor­ld’s first Diamond Exchange could open in Amsterdam. In fact until WW2, Amsterdam remained a world centre for the trade.

The first dia­mond in South Africa was found in early 1867 on the land of a poor Boer farmer - on the Orange River in the Cape of Good Hope Colony where thous­ands of Dutch and English settlers trav­elled, to farm and raise livestock. The farmer’s family collected pretty stones, show­ing one to the civil commissioner in Colesberg. He pron­oun­ced it a 21.25 carat diamond, which was purchased for £500 by Sir Phillip Wodehouse, Cape Colony Governor!

In 1870 diamond workers in Amsterdam were receiving good wages. But the in­cr­easingly high customs duties were said to threaten Amsterdam’s position as leader of the diam­ond industry. Amster­d­am’s diamond cutters and polishers increasingly looked abroad. 

This discovery prompted Boer farmers on the rivers to look carefully for stones. Small parties of prospectors moved into the region to search. Over the following months, additional diamonds continued to be found, and by 1869 these river diggings had yielded hundreds of diamonds. Soon thousands of people laid claim to land, exploring for diam­onds over the Cape Colony. Rich deposits were found, la­t­er becom­ing the famous diamond mines of South Africa. And bec­ause of the special relationship which existed between Holland and South Africa, Amst­er­dam was the heart of the diamond trade

De Beers Group was founded in 1888 by British busin­essman Cecil Rhod­es, financed by a South African diamond magnate and the London-based Rothschild Bank. This international cor­poration spec­ial­is­ed in diamond exploration, diamond min­ing, diamond retail, diam­ond trading and industrial diamond manu­fact­ur­ing sectors.

Royal Coster Diamonds,
opened 1840, Amsterdam

Estab­lish­ing factories & importing workers from Netherlands by the hund­reds, the Dutch exodus to the USA transformed New York. Within a few years, the new entrepot had super­seded that of Ams­terdam to become the dia­mond market of the world. Centred in down­town Manhattan, the emerg­ing diamond trade of the late C19th added another thriving centre of jewellery making and distribution

In 1926 Ernest Oppen­heimer (1880–1957), a German-South African who had ear­lier founded mining company Anglo Amer­ic­an with American fin­ancier JP Morgan, was elected to the board of De Beers. Oppen­heimer con­solidated De Beers until his death. By the early C21st, De Beers control­led 80-85% of rough diamond dist­rib­ution in 35 count­ries incl Bot­swana, Namibia, South Africa, Canada, India, Israel and Austral­ia. Competition has since dis­mant­led any monopoly, though De Beers still sells c35% of the world's rough diamond product­ion globally via The Diamond Trading Co.

We buy gold and diamonds, jewellers cashing in on gold's rally, 

Diamond District New York, 

Wall St Journal

Towards the late C19th and early in the C20th, art­icles about the US diamond trade frequently appeared in the Amer­ic­an press, incl­uding Scientific American and Ladies’ Home Journal. The published articles noted the very large numbers of Dutchmen in the industry, both as businessmen and as workers. Historians were pleased to fin a complex, dynamic and global Jewish economy that bound Cape Town and London, Amsterdam and New York together.

By the early 1920s, more diamond merch­ants began to con­t­emplate a move uptown, to midtown Manhattan. The prospect of in­hab­iting up-to-date quarters was one incen­tive; Grand Central Station’s prox­imity was another. Plus the downtown jewellery trade was incr­eas­ingly pushed out by the growing financial services industry.

Israel World Diamond Centre

Wiki

In Israel, the diamond industry began in 1937 when a quality polishing plant was opened by WW2 refugees from the Netherlands. In 1938 the 15% import duty on imported rough stones was removed and within a few years the diamond industry employed 3,300 skilled workers. It is the world's largest trading centre for buying, selling, cutting and polishing large diamonds.

Jan Luyken: a moralising Dutch artist

Jan Luyken (1649-1712) was an engraver and poet, who lived in a very educated, middle class part of Amsterdam. His timing was critical; he was born soon after the Dutch Republic was officially recognised by Spain as an independent Republic. So religious practice in his parents' home was in transition; at the time of his marriage Jan's father belonged to the Reformed Church but soon converted. This was when the Calvinist Church was first recognised as the official church. Non-Calvinist Protestants and Catholics could continue to worship, but quietly.

                                                          

Portrait of Jan Luyken by A. Houbraken

from the Bowyer Bible, 1700

As an adolescent, Jan Luyken was leading the good life, possibly a life full of wine, women and poetry. In 1671 he published German Lyric, a book of hedonistic poetry. There was no problem; he was young, single and not religious at the time. But I won’t examine this early work, in case it embarrassed him when the artist was older.

I am not sure what changed his life style but in 1672, aged 23, Luyken joined the Anabaptists. Then he seemed to have had a complete conversion in 1675: "In the 26th year of his life the Lord appeared in his heart in a powerful manner whereupon, afire with the love of God, he forsook his old bad company to join the God-fearing". It did not stop him creating his images, however. Luyken continued to be a versatile and productive engraver and etcher.

Anneken Hendriks, Frisian Mennonite,

burned to death in Dam Sq Amsterdam

published 1685, Wiki

BibliOdyssey reproduced images that depicted hanging, burning, torture, beheading, crucifixion and boiling, a broad artistic encyclopaedia of inhumanity. The images were extremely difficult to look at, so Luiken repeated Matthew's words: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven".

Perhaps the pain in his art reflected the pain in Luyken's own life. After 10 years of marriage and the birth of 5 children, Luyken’s wife died tragically. His son Casper (1672-1708), the only child to live into adulthood, collaborated with his father and became a well-known etcher in his own right. But even Casper died tragically at a young age, leaving a widow and young son who moved in with Jan.

The Martyrs Mirror had been first published in 1660 in Dutch by Thieleman J. van Braght. It documented the stories and testimonies of Christian martyrs, especially Anabaptists, and was said to be second only to the Bible in Mennonite homes. Luyken was given the very great honour of illustrating the 1685 edition of the Martyrs Mirror with 104 copper etchings. 30 of his plates survived and were part of The Mirror of the Martyrs Exhibit, at the Kauffman Museum at Bethel College, North Newton Kansas. The rest of the copper plates were probably destroyed in WW2 chaos.

Anabaptist Dirk Willems rescues his pursuer but is burned at the stake,

printed in1685 edition of Martyr's Mirror

Wiki

I am particularly interested in a large project that Luykens undertook in middle aged. The Book of Trades was a book of 100 engravings that Jan & his son Caspar published in 1694, illustrating various trades in Amsterdam in the Netherlands’ most productive century. The book followed the moralist contemporary style that seemed to be popular then, having a moralistic poem per trade. Morality aside, there was useful and detailed historical evidence in this book about trades that were common in late C17th Netherlands.

One example helps. The grave digger showed that when there was no room left in a church graveyard, the grave digger would have to take the old bodies out to make space for the new ones. It might have been depressing work, but in the background the observant viewer could detect a stork’s nest on the chimney. The symbols of birth, death and mortality all appeared to be an integral part of the scene.

Luyken died in poverty either because he was ill and couldn’t work, or because when his son died, Jan had to support his daughter in law and the grandchildren. Nonetheless his legacy lived on. 3,000+ of Luyken’s works survive today, especially in the field of book illustration. As well as travel literature and historical works, he used many Biblical subjects. Jan Luyken's can be found on the outer wall of the Rijksmuseum at the side of Jan Luijkenstraat, located in the neighbourhood where all the streets are named after Netherland's Golden Age artists. Perfect!

Apostle Bartholomew skinned alive and beheaded in Armenia in 70 AD 

published in 1694

Luyken’s legacy is also protected by modern historians eg Simon Schama, Embarrassment of Riches: Dutch Culture in the Golden Age (1997). For more specific references on the artist, see Biography of Jan Luyken by Josephine Brown. 

skate makers, in The Book of Trades, 1694

Facebook

Skate making was clearly an important trade in Netherlands

Caravaggio or Finson? Who???

Caravaggio, Young Sick Bacchus, 

1593-4

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1571-1610) was a brilliant artist who easily found patrons; but his unstable character and nasty temper caused him to constantly move around. Worse still, he was sentenced to death for killing a Roman nobleman in a duel in May 1606. He went to Malta (1607), became a Knight of St John and painted brilliantly. Following another violent brawl, Caravaggio was arrested and gaoled, so he made a daring escape in 1608 and fled to Sicily, then Naples. In Oct 1609 he was attacked by soldiers sent from Malta.

But Caravaggio was seriously ill; he saw Rome as a safe haven and asked his patron Cardinal Scipione Borghese for protection. The deal was Borghese would obtain the pardon, and Caravaggio would give the Cardinal all his unsold works. Expecting Pope Paul V (1605-21) would enforce the deal, Caravaggio left for Rome with his art all packed up. A week after leaving Naples, Caravaggio’s small boat sailed into the large, barracked Palo Laziale port and was promptly arrested. Seeing trouble looming again, the boat went to sea for Porto Ercole, taking the art works. After days, Caravaggio bought his freedom, searching for his art and running on the beach that hot July. He reached Porto Ercole by mid July 1610, but prison and fleeing had seriously weakened him, dying the next day. Caravaggio was thrown in a pauper’s grave, yet when news of his death spread, grief was intense.

Since Caravaggio had promised the paintings to Cardinal Borghese, he knew they were his! He sent his agent to find them and on 29th July the agent found 3 in the palace of Caravaggio’s former patron, Costanza Colonna Sforza. Alas the Prior of Capua from the Order of Malta app-eared, forcibly taking the paintings. NB Caravaggio had been defrocked in Malta, but the Prior ordered that when a knight died, his estate reverted to the Order of Malta.

Remember that since youth, Caravaggio had been a hoodlum; he scorned convention, disdained the law and was often violent. And unlike his contemporaries, Caravaggio worked alone, in his own style, and showed his patrons little respect. Yet his work had captivated people with its unique intensity. While Protestants disliked image cults, Cathol-ics embraced art’s religious power. Art played a key role in guiding the Faithful, including the illiterate, so religious art was explicit and powerful; it had to inspire Catholics to feel Christ’s sacrifice and martyrs’ suffering. Many artists loved dramatic realism, with boldly contrasting light and dark. Caravaggio had gained naturalism in both religious and secular scenes. And Orazio Gentileschi, Jusepe de Ribera and Pietro Paolini were faithful Caravaggisti.

**
Louis Finson (1574–1617) was a Flemish draughtsman, copyist and art dealer who painted portraits, religious compositions, symbolic art and genre scenes. Moving to Italy early in his career, he became one of the first Flemish followers of Caravaggio whom he knew in Naples; and the two artists were similarly aged.

Finson produced a number of copies after works by Caravaggio. He worked for years in various cities in France where he created altarpieces and portraits. And he was known for being the co-owner, together with his fellow Flemish painter and business partner Abraham Vinck, of two paintings by Caravaggio. Finson played a major role in the Northern Caravaggesque movement through his own works, and through his art dealership. Finson's Self Portrait 1613 is in the Musée des Beaux-Arts Marseille. This work was one of the matching self-portraits painted by Finson in what he called a distinct Caravaggesque style.

For c400 years nothing more was seen of them. Then in 1978 a French medical student, Christian Morand, got lucky. At a Marseille Exhibition of Provençal Art, he saw two special works. Attributed to Louis Finson (1580–1617), the two works come from the collection of scholar Nicolas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc. The oil paintings, 1) St Sebastian and 2) Penitent St Jerome 1595, were being auctioned in 1991. By then a specialist, Dr Morand failed to convince Marseille’s Musée des Beaux-Arts to buy them. So he went to the auction himself, to save the art for Provence .. but was outbid.

Later in Avignon, Morand walked in a back street and saw the 2 paintings in a shop window!! The doctor told the shop-owner his tale but didn’t have enough money to buy them; the owner was so taken by his passion that he offered a deal. Morand could take the paintings away with him, and each month he’d pay what he could. Morand was delighted. He bought a splendid new home and his 2 Finsons became the heart of his art collection. Now the family wondered if these fine paintings seemed too good for copies. And were unsigned! So what if they were actually by Caravaggio? Then Morand would need special insurance, security and conservation, all too costly!

In 2014 another miracle occurred - a Judith Beheading Holofernes was found in a Toulouse attic. Like Morand’s works, Judith was unsigned and there was also debate about the attribution. Some experts thought it was by Finson, or another Caravaggesque artist. Others thought that it was a lost Caravaggio which he’d given to Finson when he left Naples in 1607. Alas an American bought it pre-auction.

The Morands visited galleries & archives, consulted specialists and sent the Finson paintings for tests. Unable to find any other artists who could have painted these works, the Morands became convinced that Caravaggio was the only plausible artist of the paintings Caravaggio had lost at sea in 1610! But there were still issues. After Caravaggio’s death, Prior of Capua DID take some paintings from Naples’ Colonna Palace, under the Order of Malta’s instructions. He probably sent them back to Malta or used them to settle Caravaggio’s debts. It was possible that Morand’s works were among those he took, or perhaps smuggled out of Colonna Palace earlier.

Finson, St Jerome, 

1595

One last thought, presented by art expert Eric Turquin, France’s leading authority on Old Masters paintings, had staked his reputation on authenticating Carvaggio’s lost Judith and Holofernes being the real thing. The painting, depicting a grisly biblical scene of the beautiful Jewish widow Judith beheading a sleeping Assyrian general, was to be auctioned in Toulouse. Turquin told Agence France-Presse he was sure the painting was by the volatile and violent genius. Not only is it a Caravaggio, but of all the Caravaggios that are known today, this is one of the great pictures! But Italian specialists had their doubts.

Finson, Self Portrait, 1613

 

Louis Finson, Saint Sebastian

c1610

They believe it is a copy made by the Flemish artist Louis Finson, who worked alongside Caravaggio. On top of x-rays, cleaning showed that the painting was changed afterwards, with lots of retouching. The experts speculated that Finson possibly added his own touches to the canvas after Caravaggio left suddenly for Malta in 1607. The fiercely original painter had created his first canvas on the theme, the far more formal Judith Beheading Holofernes in 1598, in Palazzo Barberini in Rome.

Jacques Rogge: surgeon sportstar linguist

Belgium Jacques Rogge (1942-2021) was ed­ucated at the Jesuit Sint-Barbara College in Ghent and Univ­ersity of Ghent. I imagine that because his grandfather (cyc­l­ing) and father (track-field; hoc­key) were both professional sports­men, he was keen to study sp­orts medic­ine. In 1972, Rogge studied muscle activity during sailing using invasive needle EMG to earn his Master degree in Sports Medicine. Then he got his Medical De­gree at Bruss­els’ Free Uni.

Jacques Rogge, Juan Antonio Samaranch,  Vladimir Putin, 

following Rogge's election as IOC President in 2001

What a talented man!! Since the orthopaedic surgeon is a professional who specialises in diagnosing, treating & rehabilitating musculo­skeletal in­j­uries and diseases, it is a spec­ial­ty that requires years of training. The musculoskeletal sy­s­tem incl­udes bones, joints, ligaments, tendons, muscles and nerves. The condit­ions dealt with include arthritis, cereb­ral palsy, cong­enit­al disord­ers, degener­ative diseases, sports injuries and tu­m­­ours. Rogge worked as an orthop­aedic surgeon in Deinze near Ghent when he met his future wife Dr Anne Bovyn who did radiol­ogy. Thank­­fully in his busy practice he spoke 5 lang­uages fluently: French, German, English, Spanish and Dutch/Flemish.

Rogge was a Belgian national and international champion in rugby, win­ning 16 caps for Belgium! He was a one-time yachting world cham­p­ion. He also competed in the Finn class of sailing in three Summer Olympic Games; in Mexico 1968, Munich 1972 & Montreal 1976.

Rogge was the president of the Belgian Olympic Committee from 1989-92, and as President of the European Olympic Committee from 1989-2001. He became a member of the IOC in 1991 and joined its executive board in 1998. Rogge became President of the IOC in 2001 at the IOC Session in Moscow as the successor to Juan Antonio Samaran­ch, the for­m­­er Franco-era diplomat who had previously led the IOC since 1980. At the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Rogge became the first IOC President to stay in the Olympic village, thus enjoying clos­er contact with the athletes. His diplomatic manner and leadership style have been effective in add­ressing problems plag­uing organised sports worldwide, including corr­uption. While Samaranch had been criticised for sloppy control of performance-enhancing drugs, Dr Rog­ge initiated a high-profile zero tolerance policy on their use.

One bit of ugliness. “Allowing women ski jumpers into the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics would dilute the medals being handed out to male ski jumpers” Rogge said “Since there were only 80 women ski jump­ers in the world and the sport had not yet reached the IOC's standard for be­ing included in an Olym­pics”, Rogge loathed the suggestion the IOC was discriminating against women. Oh dear!

Jacques Rogge at the
London Olympic Village, 2012

In July 2011, a year prior to London 2012, Rogge attended a ceremony at Trafalgar Square where he invited athletes worldwide to compete in the forthcoming Olympic Games. Former Olympians the Princess Royal and Sebastian Coe unveiled the medals, and Prime Min­ister David Cameron and London Mayor Boris Johnson gave speeches. In Dec 2011, Rogge won an Officer of the Légion d'honneur from French Pres. Sarkozy.

Alas Rogge criticised Usain Bolt's gestures of jubilation af­ter winning the 100 ms in world record time (Beijing 2008) as not be­hav­ing with sportsmanship and questioned whether the Jamaican sprin­ter was a living legend in London. Bolt showed no respect to his oppon­en­ts, he said. In response to his comments, Sports col­um­nist Dan Wetzel contended that the IOC has made billions from athletes like Bolt for years! Did white winners not celebrate with great excitement?

Worse still Rogge rejected calls for a minute of silence to be held to honour the 11 Israeli Olympians murdered in the 1972 Munich Massacre, at the 2012 Summer Olympics opening ceremony. He did this de­s­pite fam­ilies of the 11 Israeli Olympic team members’ requests & political requests from the U.S, Britain and Germany. Instead Rogge opted for a quiet ceremony at Guildhall London. If the dead sportsmen had not been Jewish, would their murders have been worthy of a minute’s memorial in front of millions of viewers?

Thomas Bach and Jacques Rogge
IOC in Buenos Aires in 2013

In Buenos Aires in 2013, German Thomas Bach (a fencing gold medal­list in Montreal) was elected as Rogge’s successor. In 2014, Rogge was ap­p­ointed Special Envoy for Youth Refugees and Sport by the United Nat­ions Secretary-General, to help promote sport as an empowering tool for youth from refugee communities towards peace, security, re­­conciliation, health, education and gender equ­al­ity. Rogge saw this as his greatest legacy

In Oct 2016, The British School of Brussels opened their new sports cen­tre in Tervuren, Belgium. It was called The Jacques Rogge Sports Centre. He died in 2021, aged 79.

A Einstein (1917-55): Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, UK, USA

Albert and his first wife Mileva

German-born Albert Einstein (1879-1955) became the world’s most fam­ous physicist. I briefly examined his early life and first wife Mil­eva Marić (1875–1948) whom he married in Zurich in 1903. In 1905 he published his vital scientific papers that made him famous. By 1908, he was rec­ognised as a lead­ing scientist at Bern Uni, completing his work on the general theory of relativity.

In 1917, as director of the new Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Ph­ysics in Berlin, Einstein re-took German citizenship. Meanwhile the publication of experimental evid­ence supporting his general relat­iv­ity theory made huge impacts in acad­eme. After their 1919 divorce, Mileva took their two sons to Zurich, so Albert could immediately marry his wife-cousin Elsa and adopt her children.

Einstein first visited New York in 1921 where he was offic­ially welcomed by organiser Chaim Weizmann, President of the World Zionist Organisation. This was followed by weeks of lectures and re­c­eptions at Columbia and Princeton Un­i­v­ers­ities, and at the Nat­ional Academy of Scien­ce.

How did Einstein earn the title of one of the greatest ever gen­ius­es? With his arrival in New York; American journalists quickly picked up on the broad­er appreciation for the foreign sc­ien­tist. Apprec­iat­ion wasn’t univ­ersal because the US then was quite xenophobic, suspicious of sc­ience and fearful of dom­in­at­ion. But the nation was also greatly con­cerned with advance­ment. By the time he left the U.S in mid 1921, Einstein was indeed a genius.

He won the Physics Nobel Prize in 1922! But as a Jew, he’d closely observed the rise of Nazism in Berlin in the 1920s.

Einstein admired Toni Meyer Mendel; they first met ear­ly in Weimar Republic (1919-33), Germ­any’s noble years of demo­cracy; both the Ein­st­ein and Mendel fam­il­ies belonged to the same pacif­ist ass­oc­­iat­ion Bund Neues Vater­land. In pre-Hitler Ber­l­in, they’d all liv­ed tog­ether in Tony’s grand villa on the Wannsee, the inter­ior desig­ned by Walter Gropius. Bruno Mendel was a med­ical researcher who built a pri­vate laborat­ory in his villa!

Einstein loved playing music himself

and loved listening to concerts

 
Toni became a wealthy, emanc­ipated widow who loved travel. She was a regular compan­ion of Ein­stein, and their close friend­ship was grimly tolerated by wife Elsa. Einstein and Toni sailed together, discussed Freud, and shared concerts. Toni’s Weimar-culture intrig­ued Einstein, whose interests rang­ed­ far beyond phys­ics. He was devoted to music, playing chamber mus­ic him­self. And he was closely engaged in the excited sch­olarship of the Weimar era! When Hitler came to power, Toni quickly emigrated to Toronto.

In Mar 1933, Albert ex­iled himself in Belgium with Elsa. In late Jul 1933, after the Nazi regime forced famous German Jews to flee, Ein­stein visited the UK on a pol­it­ical mis­s­ion: to help Germ­any’s Jews. He first had a meet­ing with Winston Church­ill at Ch­art­well House to discuss Nazism.

From the Distinguished Visitors’ Gal­lery of Parliament, Einstein lis­ten­ed to a speech in the House of Com­mons. The speaker was an upper-class, right-wing Con­servative M.P, Commander Oliver Locker-Lampson who want­ed Britain to extend citizenship to desperate ref­ug­ees from outside the British Em­pire. And the House voted to sup­p­ort the MP’s bill on its first read­ing! The Nazi newsp­ap­er Völkischer Beo­bacht­er imm­ediately attacked, saying Locker-Lampson staged the event sole­ly for self-publicity.

Albert and his second wife, Elsa

always travelling

Chaim Weizmann welcomed Albert to New York, 1921

Later the president of Israel (1949–52)

Thousands cheered hia motorcade driving to City Hall 

for a welcome by New York City's mayor, April 1921.

Einstein returned to Belgium, where the Nazi leadership savaged him. Firstly they attacked Albert’s “pacifism” when he called for Europ­ean rearmament against the Ger­man th­reat. Secondly Einstein had pub­licly end­orsed a left-wing book The Brown Book of the Hitler Ter­r­or i.e an eye­witness report from Germ­any with horrify­ing photos of Nazi pogroms, burn­ings and tort­ur­es. Fortunately the Belgian king had the police constantly protect Einstein. Still, a secret Nazi terror org­anis­ation Fehme had targeted the scientist

Einstein packed some vital books and papers, and trav­elled from Bel­g­ium to the UK. He went to a hut on a Norfolk heath, to focus on theor­etical physics in peace. During his UK visit in Sep-Oct 1933, organised by Locker-Lampson, Britain’s national news­papers photog­raphed Einstein in hiding! Locker-Lampson org­an­ised a public meeting at the Royal Albert Hall; the German phys­icist and British speakers raised funds for academic Jewish Germ­an ref­ug­ees. Einstein spoke on Science and Civil­is­ation in his cautious Eng­lish, to huge applause from the huge audience. Note there were also British Union of Fascists Blackshirts att­end­ing. Einstein told newspapers the kindness of the British people had touched his heart deeply. Then left for USA.

Einstein lived the rest of his life in America, at the In­stitute for Advanced Study in Princeton. He was so involved with both physics and Cold War politics that he never returned to Eur­ope. Elsa was diag­­­­­nosed with organ failure in 1935 and died in 1936. He continued his work and his active social life, with a Russian sculptor’s wife, secretary Betty Neumann, and Toni Mendel again.

In 1953 with the USA gripped by the televised McCarthy hear­ings, Einstein took a well reported public stand against the loathed House Un-American Activities Committee.

In July 1955 after Einstein’s death, British academic Bertrand Rus­sell announced the Russell-Einstein Man­ifesto in London. Warn­ing the world of the dangers of a nuc­l­ear war, the signature had been Eins­tein’s last public act.

Find Einstein on the Road, to read his travelling diaries.

Gin history, from medicine to community chaos to grand palaces

 The first reference to a spirit flavoured with jenever-juniper was in C13th Flemish manusc­ripts. Bols family distillery op­ened in Amst­erdam in 1575 and by the early 1600s, the Dutch were seriously pro­ducing gin in hundreds of distilleries in Amster­dam alone.

Gin Lane 1751,  by William Hogarth
Tate Britain

Like so many products, gin was originally produced as a medic­ine, distributed by Dutch chemists for the treatment of gout and dys­pep­sia. Consumed in large enough quantit­ies, it pro­b­ab­ly did help ame­l­­iorate the symptoms, albeit temporar­ily. Dutch physicians in the ear­ly 1600s created the drink, mix­ing jun­ip­er berry oil with a sp­ir­it to make medicine more pleasant for pat­ients. And with added botan­icals. In fact it was so palatable that “ill­ness­es” soared as the masses wanted the gin that was only available in pharm­acies.

The invention of the distillation column led to a significant shift in quality and the emergence of the new gin, London Dry style. The smoother taste of the distilled spirit allowed for the botan­ic­als’ aromas to dominate, so many companies developed a wider range of flavourings.

The Thirty Years’ War 1618-48 was significant. When British sol­d­iers were fighting alongside the Dutch, they saw that the Dut­ch­ sol­diers were extremely courageous. This bravery was attrib­uted to the calming effects of the jenever that they sip­ped from small bot­tles hanging from their belts/aka Dutch courage. English sold­iers­ returning home from the war spread the news and the Dutch soon be­gan to export it in their vast shipping fleet.

Distillation of gin in Britain start­ed when King Charles I formed the Worshipful Co. of Distillers in 1638. But traditional gin con­t­in­ued to travel across the Eng­lish Channel to Britain, partic­ularly with Prince William of Orange and his Dutch troops, as noted. When they took the British throne, William & Mary allowed the British to make and sell spir­its, providing they came from home-grown Eng­lish corn. King William eliminated taxation and licencing on local gin, whilst raising taxes on im­ported foreign spirits. Spirit pric­es dr­opped and heavier beer taxes increased the demand for gin; this helped raise the money needed for King William’s exhausting wars.

With water-borne diseas­es preval­ent in large Brit­ish cities, gin be­came the safe drink for the poor in the late C17th-early C18th. 7,000+ spirit shops sprung up around London and gin became the op­ium of common peop­le, and historians thought that by 1720 a quarter of London’s house­holds bottled their own gin! The Gin Craze era was so rem­ark­able that Parl­ia­ment had to pass 5 major legis­lative acts in 22 years, try­ing to limit the gin drinking.

Gin Lane 1751 by William Hogarth depicted soc­ial breakdown suppos­edly caused by gin. He showed the drinking craze of the mid-1700s led to ne­g­­lectful, drunk moth­ers who couldn’t even protect their own chil­­d­ren. Thus gin came to be called Mother’s Ruin! The brew­ing ind­ust­ry had asked Hogarth to illustrate that beer consumption was far healthier than drinking gin.

Largely successful, the Dutch Gin Act 1751 passed and the pas­s­ion for gin finally slowed down in the Netherlands. However in Bri­t­ain lots of fun was still to be had at the Frost Fairs on the fr­ozen River Thames; crowds would gather to find the stalls sell­ing hot gin and ginger­bread! Enterprising Londoners looked to make a quick profit from fairs.

As consumption rose, the British government tried to curb the gr­owing gin-passion by introducing a distil­ler’s licence for an unthinkable price: £50. Pieces of legisl­at­ion were introd­uced in the mid C18th, to legalise licensed retailers and out­law un­lic­en­sed gin shops. Amazingly it happened. Consumption drop­ped and more respectable firms took up distill­at­ion, producing better qu­ality products and joining high society. Yet the Gin Act of 1769 led to days of riots across London in protest; it had gone too far.

The Gin Palace, Dublin
built in the Victorian era, renovated since
designmynight

The Brit­ish Em­p­ire expanded into hot climates; mosquitos carried mal­aria, but the sol­diers and colon­is­ts had lit­tle immunity. As they took over the governance of India, British immigrants faced the rav­ages of malaria. But the British could only pro­t­ect them­sel­ves ag­ainst malaria once quinine was discovered in 1820, even if it tas­ted bitter. A local cure came from the bark of the fever tree which con­t­ained the bitter quinine. To make it more palatable, sugar, lime, ice and gin were added; the G&T was born, the dis­t­inct­ively British col­onial drink. Need­less to say when the troops arrived back in Brit­ain the practice came with them.

Another medical demand on gin occurred in the British Navy. It was believed that Angostura bitters relieved seasickness and as with tonic, the sailors agreed that bitters were a great accompan­iment to the gin. Luckily the navy looked after its officers who were paid a portion of their wage.. in gin. Plus it was found that bitters produc­ed a widely enjoyed pink gin.

In the late 1820s the first Gin Palaces were established for Brit­ain’s gentle­men. They had to be licensed and sell wine, but mostly their lavish bars were selling gin. They were based on the new fas­hionable shops being built then, expensively fitted out with long counters, luxurious furnishings, ornate mirrors, etched glass and gas lights.

After campaigns led by the Prohib­ition Party and the Women’s Chris­tian Temperance Union in U.S, the Volst­ead Act was pass­ed in 1919 banning alcohol consumption. Most cit­iz­ens were unhappy during the 13 years of Proh­ib­ition, so illegal bars mult­ip­l­ied. And gin cock­tails were developed, to disguise the taste of cheap gin. Smuggled al­cohol was insufficient to satisfy dem­and, so many got their own alcohol via moonshine and boot-legging. Bathtub Gin emerged in 1920 when desperate dist­il­lers went underground, using household tools to make cheap spirits.

Bols Distillery, Amsterdam

Artistic gin cocktails
TrendHunter

Vincent van Gogh: art genius, mental health tragic.

The Museum Square in Amsterdam is the key place in the Dutch capital regard­ing art and culture, higlighting the Rijks­museum and Stedelijk Museum, the Concert­ge­bouw and the Van Gogh Museum.

van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam

Arch Daily

Museum Square, Amsterdam

Van Gogh Museum (L) and the Rijksmuseum (R), 

Wiki

Three storeys of art on display

Amsterdamtips.com

De­d­icated to the life and works of Vincent van Gogh (1853-90) and his cont­em­poraries, this is one of the most famous museums in Europe. Housed across 2 adjoining buildings, most of the 200 paintings and 400 drawings by the legendary artist are in the site designed by Dut­ch arch­itect Gerrit Rietveld (d1964), part of the modern De Stijl art move­ment. This first section of the museum was opened in 1973.

In 1999 the museum opened the new Exhibition Wing, designed by Japan­ese archit­ect Kur­ok­awa Kisho. Connected by an entr­ance hall, and used for major temporary exhibitions, this wing had an open de­sign that used geomet­r­ical forms and allowed natural light into the exhibition space. Kurokawa buried most of his building, connecting it with the old museum through an underground passage, to minimise its visual im­pact on the environment. But note the peculiar curved roof that continued to attract attention.

The core of the collection came from Theo van Gogh, Vincent’s  very patient young­er brother. It remained in the family until 1962, when with the Dutch government help, the artist’s nephew Vincent van Gogh (1890–1978), donated the collection to the Vincent van Gogh Found­at­ion. Then nephew Vincent, founder of Van Gogh Museum gave the collect­ion to the museum on a permanent loan.

In 2014, construction began on a new entrance hall in Museum Square. The new wing has a basement below and two floors above, built in the open space adjacent to the main museum building. The transpar­ent en­tr­ance hall was built to allow its very light appearance. The curv­ed glass panels collab­orated with the vertical glass fins, which in turn worked together with the building’s steel structure. Inside, the glass staircase is supported by glass arches. The new entrance build­ing is the largest glass structure in the nation.

The museum has since added works acqu­ired via purchase and donat­ion. It fea­tured a research library that was opened to the pu­blic, and an aud­it­or­ium for public lectures and films about van Gogh. The 2nd floor featured temporary exhibitions and the top floor showcased Imp­res­sionist and Postimpressionist works by van Gogh’s cont­emp­­or­aries: works by C19th Fr­en­ch scul­ptor, Auguste Rodin, and pain­t­ings by Paul Gaug­uin, Éd­ouard Manet, Claude Mo­net, Émile Bern­ard, Mary Cassatt and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec.

The biggest collection of Van Gogh’s works in the world, it is home to both the iconic Self-portrait (1888) and Sunflowers (1889), as well as The Painter of Sunflowers (1888), a Paul Gauguin portrait of Van Gogh that combines the two works.

Self-Portrait with Grey Felt Hat, 1887

Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam

TicketLens

In the troubled genius’ expressive paintings and drawings, learn about Van Gogh’s personal, often difficult history - single, lonely, never sold a single painting, relied on his brother for money. The exhibit­ions include c700 of the artist’s letters, giving a first-hand look in­to his state of mind, and his brother's.

Vincent van Gogh then lived in the French village of Auvers-sur-Oise near Paris. He was feeling opt­im­ist­ic and made some of his famous master­pieces, including Wheatfield with Crows, Doc­tor Paul Gachet and The Church of Auvers-sur-Oise. He was highly productive, often creat­ing more than a painting a day, while experimenting with new approaches to colour, brushwork, formats and subjects. This cruc­ial final phase in van Gogh’s career is in the Van Gogh in Auv­ers: His Final Months exhibition. The English-French-Dutch catalogue incl­ud­es the 5 paintings that Van Gogh created in Auvers in his fin­al mon­ths. His­t­orical photo­graphs and maps show the pl­ac­es where he worked and found his inspiration, finding things of beaut­y to paint around the town.

But inspiring as his new surroundings were, his loneliness and dep­ression mounted. Dr Paul Gachet was a doctor with whom van Gogh lived, after he was released after a year in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence’s mental asylum. Gachet cared for Van Gogh till the end, showing how Van Gogh first experim­ented with etching, while revealing his special connection with Dr Gachet. Then the artist took his own life in July 1890. 

Portrait of Dr. Gachet,

by van Gogh, 1890. Wiki

auction at Christie's NY 1990, for US$82.5 million 

Thankfully he left behind a fine body of work, so this exhibition is a great opportunity to see 50+ paintings and 30 draw­ings by van Gogh that have never before been shown together. It feat­ures spec­ial loans from private collections and museums around the world, and an audio guide is available in 11 languages. But remember to book early because 1.5 million visitors arrive here each year!

In a 3-part video series called Van Gogh Ex­perts Explain: His Final Months, cur­ators and resear­chers talk about the multitude of works Van Gogh produced, what inspired him and how he felt then.

Beautiful art objects: 18th century tobacco.

Polished English agate snuff box (above). 

with fine, 10-carat gold foliage, c1730

1st Dibs

Smoking became normal at every level of British society consumed tobacco in greater quantities from the C17th on. Originally imported from the slave plantations in the Americas, by the middle of the C17th the herba nicotiana-tobacco plant was being also being grown commercially in Europe. Angela McShane showed that this addictive product was profitable, its trade was monopolistic and rife with crime and controversy. Debates raged in the press over tobacco’s effects.

In Counterblaste to Tobacco (1604), King James I dis­couraged smoking, warn­ing that it caused cancer but noted that elite men found life as a non-smoker lonely. In 1619 a procl­amation attempted to ban smoking from alehouses, while in the 1620s taxes were imposed to make tobacco VERY expensive. Yet by the 1630s the industry was too valuable for the government to limit. Key Parliamentarians were developing interests in over­seas plantations.

As Britain got hooked on tobacco, smoking paraphernalia cropped up quickly. Items such as tobacco boxes provide an insight into the anxieties and aspirations of the early modern psyche. Even the clay pipe, light and tobacco could be bought in an ale-house, tavern or coffee house. Personalised tobacco boxes soon became an indis­pen­s­­able accessory for the British smoker. They were noted in printed literature from the early C17th and later in wills.

Smoking and snuffing developed in own elaborate ritual that involved sharing and borrowing. Socialised smoking in alehouses became common but, by the late 1600s, lighting a pipe with a friend at home had also became a ritualised social practice. This soc­iable smoking helped friends build up a close, mutual familiarity.

Anxieties around loss did not end with the obligation to share in convivial company: tobacco boxes were the first thing thieves looked for, as criminal court records stated. Plus there was another sign: many men wore their tobacco box very close to the body. In 1711 a man advertised for his lost ivory-enamel snuff box offering half a guinea reward!

Even items bought off the shelf, complete with general messages, were then personalised with  inscriptions & initials. Once pers­onalised, even the humblest boxes revealed a great deal about an owner’s life, personality, interests, social relationships and trade. A Scottish black-smith had his name, trade and town proudly inscribed on his 1726 tobacco box, celebrating his apprentice­ship's end. 

Like alcohol, tobacco developed its own literary presence. There were many celebrity smokers, including philosopher Thomas Hobbes and scientist Isaac Newton who argued that smoking helped their creativity. The poet George Daniel declared tobacco a Nursing Fame, while Samuel Rowlands needed a continuous supply of tobacco to perfume his writing brain. Book-shaped boxes became especially popular in the C18th, drawing attention to their owners’ bookish interests or to their profession. In 1725 a lawyer and the auditor for Norwich Cathedral, had a brass box that was shaped like a book with elaborate calligraphy on the covers. 

Dutch silver book-shaped tobacco box and cover  

Marks of schoonhoven, c1793

Boxes were often decorated in ways that advertised their owner’s social status, especially a coat of arms. During the herald’s visit to London in 1687, eight men brought silver tobacco boxes as evidence of their family’s standing. Those who could only aspire to arms would make up a design and have it applied to tob­ac­co boxes.

And boxes were ideal for the display of royal arms or portraits that expressed a smoker’s allegiances. To facilitate loyal smoking, the printmaker Peter Stent sold small prints of royalty and other nobility to adorn tobacco boxes. In celebration of Charles II’s coronation in 1661, for example, a special image was developed. 

Silver tobacco box, oval and with hinged lids.  
Francis Harache, London c1755,  
crest and arms of William Wither.

Horn or tortoiseshell boxes began to be moulded over portrait medals, while boxes of every quality were decorated with the royal arms or heads. Or referencing the government of the day. And some boxes were made to encourage dis­loy­alty. In 1718, after the acc­es­sion of the unpopular King George I, an obscene snuff box reflecting on the king was sold openly from shops at the Royal Exchange.

Though the Church never expressly encouraged tobacco, some tobacco boxes lauded the anxieties of Protestantism over the impermanence of human life and the uncert­ainty of salvation. One brass box was inscribed on one side with a relevant verse from Proverbs. The in­scription emphasised the comfort of family and the simple pleasures of a happy Protestant life. At 18 John Pinder attended Cambridge then started his cler­ical career as a deacon in York. He celeb­rated his homecoming by adding the date, name and diocese on a secondhand brass tobacco box.

Personal tobacco boxes could be used as a mirror, a perpetual cal­endar, for carrying letters. Sometimes they were totally readapted eg brass boxes could be converted into a pounce pot used by callig­raphers to dry ink. Tobacco boxes were also family heirlooms and memorials. In 1713, Henry Monck presented his well-known horn box, bought at the local Horn Fair, to the members of the convivial Past Overseers Society, of which he was a founder. He shared its contents with co-members at every tavern meeting.

Tortoiseshell double pipe case with silver mounts, 

and snuff box early C18th, 24 cm.  

Christie’s Images 2010

The stopper/rammer was another essential piece of equipment, coming in a variety of materials and often taking a figurative form of rel­evance to their original owner. And the tobacco pipe case which was smoker’s pocket-case for holding a short meerschaum or clay pipe. Remember the clay tobacco pipe was popular for a couple of centuries, so many of the pipe cases were wonderful examples of crafts­manship, made from fruitwood, silver, tortoiseshell, boxwood or even leath­er. By the late C18th, ALL tobacco equipment clearly provided a canvas to make statements of ident­ity, allowing us to better under­stand status and social practices around tobacco objects.    

Snuff box of King Frederick II, c1770,

Charlottenburg Silver Vault