Century Magazine/Volume 49/Issue 2/Old Dutch Masters. Anthony van Dyck

Anthony van Dyck was born at Antwerp, in 1599, of well-to-do parents. His mother was celebrated for a rare degree of skill in embroidery, and her love and sympathy guided the artist's infancy, which manifested itself in a precocious genius for art. She died when he was only eight years old, but his father made careful provision for the continuance of his artistic studies, and placed him, at the age of ten years, with Hendrik van Balen, a historical painter of great merit, and at the age of fifteen or sixteen he passed to the studio of Rubens, where he became this master's first and favorite pupil. Here his progress was so rapid that in 1618 he was enrolled as a master in the registers of the Gild of Saint Luke — an honor unprecedented in the case of a painter who had not yet completed his nineteenth year. Rubens now advised him to go to Italy and complete his education by the study of the great Italian masters, and, furthermore, to make portraiture his special vocation. But as his pictures were attracting attention far and wide, he was induced to accept an invitation to visit the English court of James I., which he did in 1620, when only twenty-one years old. The death of his father, however, among other events, brought him back to Antwerp in 1623, and immediately after his father's burial he resolved to depart for Italy, as Rubens had advised. At Venice, his first stopping-place, his time was assiduously occupied in studying and copying the works of Titian, Giorgione, Veronese, etc., and his sketch-books remain to attest the severity of his self-discipline, being crowded with memoranda from the treasures of Venetian galleries. Some idea of the marvelous rapidity of his brush is given in the fact that, proceeding to Genoa in this same year, 1623, and finding himself inundated with commissions from the nobility, who actually competed for the honor of sitting to him, he here completed portraits of the illustrious scions of the houses of Balbi, Spinola, Raggi, Pallavicino, Brignole, Durazzo, — two of which were equestrian portraits, — besides painting a few classical and sacred pictures, upward of a dozen important works, which are still the pride of the Genoese galleries, and before the year was ended had left the city for Rome. And this is not counting two religious works which upon his outset he executed for the parish church of Saventhem, not far from Brussels, and which are considered remarkably fine examples of his early style. At Rome he stayed two years, was the guest of Cardinal Bentivoglio, and had commissions from the Pope and many of the noble families. His portrait of the cardinal, now in the Pitti Palace at Florence, shows all the highest qualities of the art, and glows with the rich and harmonious coloring of the Venetians. His journeyings in Italy included Florence, Milan, Turin, and other cities, and he even went as far south as Sicily, where, at Palermo, he produced some remarkable portraits. When, in 1626, he finally returned to Antwerp, where his master Rubens was at the zenith of his glory, he naturally suffered an eclipse; but Rubens, soon departing on an embassy to Spain, left the field clear to his famous pupil, and demands for his works increased thick and fast. During the five years that followed before he took up his permanent abode in England, his brush was kept incessantly busy, and he painted many of his finest creations. Of the "Crucifixion," painted for the Church of the Récollets at Mechlin, but now to be seen in the cathedral of that city, Sir Joshua Reynolds has the following: "This picture, on the whole, may be considered as one of the first pictures in the world, and gives the highest idea of Van Dyk's power; it shows that he had truly a genius for history painting, if it had not been taken off by portraits." Van Dyck also executed many etchings during this period, which are esteemed very highly.

Van Dyck quitted Flanders for good in 1632, and repaired once more to the court of England. The Earl of Arundel, his friend, was instrumental in bringing his work under the notice of Charles I., and the picture which is said to have been the immediate cause of the king's determination to have Van Dyck at court was a portrait he had painted of one of the court musicians named Laniere. Walpole, in his life of Mrs. Mary Beale, quotes an interesting passage from the manuscript diary of her husband relating to this picture, which affords a glimpse of the assiduity of the artist:


 * 1672. 20 April.
 * … Mr. Lely told me at the same time, as he was studiously looking at my Bishop's picture of Van Dyck's, and I chanced to ask him how Sir Antony cou'd possibly devise to finish in one day a face that was so exceeding full of work, and wrought up to so extraordinary a perfection — I believe, said he, he painted it over fourteen times. And upon that he took occasion to speak of Mr. Nicholas Laniere's picture of Sr. Anto. V. D. doing which, said he, Mr. Laniere himself told me he satt seaven entire dayes for it to Sr. Anto. and that he painted upon it of all those seaven dayes both morning and afternoon, and only intermitted the time they were at dinner. And he said likewise, that tho' Mr. Laniere satt so often and so long for his picture, that he was not permitted so much as once to see it till he had perfectly finished the face to his own satisfaction. This was the picture which being show'd to king Charles I., caused him to give order that V. Dyck shou'd be sent for over into England.

Van Dyck was received at court with every mark of favor and distinction, and his rapid preferment was such that after three months the king made him a knight, and settled on him a pension of two hundred pounds a year for life. His handsome person, engaging manners, and brilliant social gifts, together with the reputation of his talents and the special favor of the king, combined to make him the lion of the day, and his studio was the resort of the nobility. Meanwhile his industry was unflagging, and his fertility and productiveness were great. Often the king himself would drop down in his barge to spend an afternoon in the fascinating society of the gifted young artist. His habits were luxurious and extravagant to prodigality, and his hospitality was unbounded. He kept open house, and frequently detained his noble sitters to princely dinners. He figured as a patron of the fine arts, was fond of music, and specially liberal to musicians, whose services he deemed indispensable to the perfection of any social entertainment. But though his receipts were great, his expenditures were greater, and he often found himself in pecuniary straits. He frankly confessed to the king, on one occasion when money matters were broached, that "a man whose house is open to his friends, and his purse to his mistress, is likely to make acquaintance with empty coffers." His financial troubles were doubtless aggravated by the disturbed condition of the country, which was verging on a revolution. His pension came to remain unpaid, and court patronage to be a thing more of honor than of profit. Instead of endeavoring to balance his accounts by the ordinary method of economy and hard work, he was led into seeking gold in the alembic — experimenting with alchemy in the delusive pursuit of the philosopher's stone. In this he was encouraged by the example or advice of his friend Sir Kenelm Digby, and it was a subject which in those days appeared to many intelligent minds worthy of consideration. In this vain quest of treasure he spent much precious time, money, and health. A friend came from Flanders to visit him at this period, and found him brooding over his crucible, broken in health and spirits — a complete wreck. His friends and the king, considering his miserable condition, concluded that a good marriage would change the course of his mind, and give him a fresh impetus. Accordingly he was married about 1640 to Lady Mary Ruthven, a charming, well-born maiden; but sickness and disappointments terminated the brief remainder of his career in 1641. Notwithstanding his expensive style of living, he left property to the value of about a hundred thousand dollars. The works he produced were said to reach the extraordinary number of 971.

Van Dyck had many pupils and assistants, chief among whom were Jan de Reyn, David Beek, and James Gandy, men of extraordinary ability and swiftness of hand, to whose assistance he must have owed his ability to accomplish so much.

So far as portraiture goes, Van Dyck occupies, with Titian and Velasquez, the first place: His works have an air of elegance and distinction and a mundane grace and courtliness naturally befitting his title of "painter to the king." The Italians called him "il pittore cavalieresco." Without the stamina and natural robustness of his great master Rubens, his portraits are better in point of refinement and grace. But one must know his master to form a just appreciation of his position. Though the majority of his works are in the private houses of the English nobility, and comparatively few are found in public museums, those which I have engraved from the Louvre, viz., "Portrait of a Lady and Her Daughter," "Portrait of Richardot and His Son." and "The Madonna of the Donors," are among the best.