Page:Hofstede de Groot catalogue raisonné, Volume 1, 1908.djvu/364

 340 GERARD DOU SECT. position, subject-matter, and execution, Koedijk's direct dependence upon Dou. In neatness of handling Koedijk is scarcely inferior to Dou, while in delicacy of colouring he perhaps surpasses his master. To sell any one a " Spreeuw " (or starling) for a " Dou " (or dove) was an eighteenth-century saying, of the application of which we can form no correct idea from the few remaining pictures of JACOB VAN SPREEUW, who flourished in the middle of the seventeenth century. We think of him as a pupil of Brekelenkam rather than as a direct imitator of Dou. A more probable imitator of Dou was the painter whose portraits ot Rembrandt's parents were shown at the Amsterdam Exhibition of 1906 under the name of Dou (Nos. 30 and 31), but who signed the portraits with a monogram made out of the letters G, A, and R, which cannot possibly be interpreted as Dou's own. Possibly the monogram consisted originally of the letters A and R only, to which a large G was afterwards prefixed to make it at least similar to Dou's signature. The author of this monogram shows little individuality, and in a certain hardness of style contrasts unfavourably with his master. The same may be said of the painter of " The Unfaithful Servant," in the gallery at Kassel, which is signed " Brouwer." This painter is, for reasons that are not apparent, identified with CORNELIS BROUWER, the dilettante well known from Houbraken's references to him, who worked in the middle of the seventeenth century, and was master of the Guild in Rotterdam on October 19, 1671. Since this picture the only one of its kind can scarcely, for reasons of style, have been painted later than 1640, it must have been an early work of Cornelis Brouwer's, if it is rightly attributed to him. ARIE or ARY DE Vois (about 1630-1680) is sometimes said to have been a direct pupil of Gerard Dou, but the theory is neither proved nor made entirely credible by the style of his works. He was, along with Jan Steen, a pupil of Nicolaes Knupfer, and possibly at a later period he frequented Dou's studio to improve his own technique. A receipt that has been preserved for their tuition fees shows that this was the case with BARTHOLOMEUS MATON (about 1643 or i646-after 1682) and MATHIJS NAIVEU (about i647~about 1721), who were both pupils of Dou in the year 1669. Maton developed into an artist who, in the best of his rare pictures as in the Six collection at Amsterdam equalled the better-known genre painters of his time. Naiveu, however, creates an unfavourable impression with his harsh and glaring colour, his hard drawing, and restless composition. KAREL DE MOOR (1656-1738) was one of the last pupils of Dou. The age which admired him as one of the greatest artists of all time has long passed away. He now has for us only an historic interest. A still worse fate has befallen G. MAES and MOIER, who are definitely described as pupils of Dou by contemporary biographers of artists. None of their works is known to exist.