RKD STUDIES

Originally, Hoet was trained as a painter by his namesake father, but today only very few paintings can be attributed to him. He probably did quite a lot of decorative work, such as painting coaches. Today he is primarily known as the compiler of the Catalogus van schilderijen met derzelven prijzen, published in 1752 and containing the collected catalogues of numerous 17th- and 18th-century auctions of paintings, including records of the proceeds.¹ With this book he wanted to enable art lovers and dealers to see what prices paintings had fetched at auction and get some idea of what a reasonable price would be for a work they were contemplating to buy or sell themselves. Anyone interested could also use it to try and trace the provenance of a painting they wanted to buy or sell, or to ascertain whether or not the work was attributed to a well-known master.

Hoet’s most important source of income must have been the art trade. In the 1730s he started a business venture with Jacques de Roore, who originated from the Southern Netherlands. Later he became an independent art dealer with an international clientele. His most important client was Wilhelm von Hessen-Kassel, whose collection forms the core of the famous museum in Kassel, Germany. In 1753 Hoet travelled to Germany—first to Kassel, and from there to Dresden—accompanied by Aert Schouman (1710–1792) and Johann Georg Freesen (1701–1777), Wilhelm’s court painter [5].² They must have met Christian Ludwig von Hagedorn (1712–1780), an avid art collector, influential author and tastemaker with a particular interest in Netherlandish art.³

Hoet acquired his paintings on various local art markets in Europe: in The Hague, Delft, and Rotterdam, he mainly bought North Netherlandish cabinet pictures [6]; in Antwerp he acquired a number of larger paintings by South Netherlandish masters such as Rubens [7] and David Teniers II [8]; whereas in Paris he bought Italian works from the High-Renaissance and Baroque.⁴ One of Hoet’s most important transactions was the acquisition of eight paintings at the Tallard sale in Paris. The collection of paintings, prints and drawings, sculpture and porcelain formerly owned by Marie Joseph d’Hostun (1683–1755), duc de Tallard — one of the most prestigious of the time — was auctioned in the spring of 1756.⁵ Among the works in his collection were paintings by or attributed to Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519),⁶ Titian (1488/1490–1576), Rubens, Van Dyck and Rembrandt [9-10]. Remarkably, it did not include the highly fashionable small-format cabinet pictures by painters such Dou, Van Mieris, Godefridus Schalcken (1643–1706) and Van Poelenburch. In the introduction to the sales catalogue, the characteristics of the collection were summarised: ‘The paintings of the great Italian masters have always been regarded as veritable masterpieces: they are the only paintings through which a collector can gain the respect of the true connoisseurs. The collection of the late Duc de Tallard is rightly mentioned as the first in France, after those of the King and the Duc d’Orléans’.⁷

5
Aert Schouman
Carriage with which the artist and Gerard Hoet II traveled in Germany, 1753
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv./cat.nr. RP-T-00-2915(R)

6
Paulus Potter
Landscape with a farmyard, dated 1649
Sint-Petersburg, Hermitage, inv./cat.nr. 820

The authors of the sales catalogue, the art dealers Pierre Rémy (c. 1715–1797) and Jean-Baptiste Glomy (1711–1786), explicitly agreed with Tallard’s preference for Italian painting.⁸ He had only bought art from other countries, such as the Netherlands, if the artists had worked ‘in a noble and sublime genre’, e.g. Rubens, Van Dyck and those Southern-Netherlandish masters ‘who through the dignity of their subject matter & the admirable harmony of their marvellous colours are worth a place next to the works of the most important masters’. According to Rémy and Glomy it was true that the majority of North and South Netherlandish paintings were ‘admirably lifelike because of their fine manner of painting & the pleasant use of colours’, but ‘… the intellect cannot find anything in the subject matter with which it can preoccupy itself. These paintings only represent superficial and momentary beauty’.

Despite the fact that Tallard, Rémy and Glomy were not alone in their opinion—Netherlandish art was traditionally criticised in France for these reasons—a growing number of collectors were of a different opinion, as Rémy and Glomy admitted grudgingly: ‘Nearly all of our cabinets are presently filled with these little Flemish and Dutch paintings.[…] But let us not be afraid that this fashion will firmly take root. It will pass and make place for a purer taste’.⁹ However, Rémy and Glomy have proved themselves entirely wrong in their prediction that this fashion would soon pass: Netherlandish cabinet pictures would remain highly fashionable in France —and elsewhere—for a very long time.¹⁰

Although Rémy and Glomy extensively and thoroughly described Tallard’s paintings — including questions of attribution, authenticity, provenance, etc. —, Wilhelm von Hessen-Kassel did not want to rely on the catalogue alone. A couple of letters express his need to receive more information. They clarify the way he used Hoet’s expertise and connoisseurship in order to successfully buy artworks.

Before the auction, Wilhelm sent Hoet a copy of the sales catalogue from Kassel, in which he had marked his preferences.¹¹ He explicitly entrusted the art dealer with the purchase of the paintings in Paris. With his expertise he should be able to judge whether the paintings on offer were originals or copies, whether they belonged to the artist’s ‘best period’, and whether the price was reasonable. Hoet charged a commission of five percent over the spent amount, but Wilhelm only accepted three. In Paris the art dealer stayed with the widow of Edmé-François Gersaint (1694–1750), a famous colleague who had died in 1750, in their house on the Pont Nôtre Dame.¹²

In the most interesting letter of the correspondence concerning the Tallard sale, dated 5 March 1756 [11], Hoet reported to Wilhelm which of the marked paintings he considered good and authentic:

‘No. 4 [Andrea del Sarto, The Holy Family [12]] is good and original.

I don’t have time because the mail is late. So his Highness will have to satisfy himself with these short notes, and because his Highness entrusted me with this commission I will only buy a painting if it is of high quality.
No. 7 [Daniele da Volterra, Christ’s Bearing of the Cross] I do not recognise as good – authentic,
No. 8 [Francesco Vanni, Christ and the Pharisees] is not good,
No. 25 [Domenico Fetti, The Healing of Tobias’ Father] is good and original,
No. 59 [Annibale Carracci, Mary and Child] is not original, but no. 52 [Annibale Carracci, Saint Francis] is good and no. 53 [Annibale Carracci, Saint Jerome] and no. 55 [Annibale Carracci, Mary with Child] are also good. The rest of the paintings by “Carats” are “onegten knolle” [i.e. inauthentic crap].
No. 71 [Guercino, Judith and Holofernes] is good and original,
No. 82 [Titian, Portrait of a Nobleman [13]] it is not marked so it will probably not be very good, but no. 83 [Titian, The Duchess of Parma with her Daughter] is good, no. 84 [Titian, Allegory with the Portraits of Alfonso d’Este, Julius II and Charles V [14]] as well,
No. 91 [Jacopo Bassano, The Wedding at Cana] is very good,
No. 101 [Jacopo Tintoretto, The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus] is good,
No. 104 [Paolo Veronese, Mary and Child] also good,
No. 139 [Peter Paul Rubens, Saint Cecilia [15]] is very good in the Flemish manner; this is a famous painting in Paris,
No. 140 [Peter Paul Rubens, The Adoration of the Shepherds [16]] is also good,
No. 141 [Peter Paul Rubens, A Landscape [17]] is “extra”, will be expensive, because landscapes by Rubens are rare,
No. 150 and no. 151 [Anthony van Dyck, Portrait of a Woman, possibly identical with [18] and Portrait of a Man, possibly identical with [19]] are both very good and original. If they are not what they are supposed to be, I will not buy them.

Your Highness, please leave it to me because it is impossible to explain on paper, especially if the time lacks to do it properly’.¹³

11
Letter by Gerard Hoet, 5 March 1756
Kassel, Archive Gemäldegalerie

12
Andrea del Sarto
The Virgin and Child with St Catherine, St Elizabeth and St John the Baptist, 1513
Sint-Petersburg, Hermitage, inv./cat.nr. ГЭ-62

13
Tiziano
Portrait of a nobleman, c. 1550
Kassel, Museum Schloss Wilhelmshöhe, inv./cat.nr. GK 488

14
Tiziano
Allegory of prudence, 1550-1565
London (England), National Gallery (London), inv./cat.nr. NG6376

15
Peter Paul Rubens
Saint Cecilia playing the virginal, c. 1639
Berlin (city, Germany), Gemäldegalerie (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin), inv./cat.nr. 781

Hoet’s comments on quality and authenticity reveal a somewhat similar attitude towards matters of attribution and aesthetic assessment of paintings as in the case of Rémy’s innovative Tallard sales catalogue, or the annotations in a copy of that same catalogue written by Pierre Jean Mariette (1694–1774), Hoet’s famous French colleague (see appendix for a close comparison of these sources).¹⁴ Several sources indicate that Hoet, like Mariette and Rémy, had gained an international reputation as a fine connoisseur.¹⁵

The maximum amount of money Wilhelm von Hessen-Kassel allowed Hoet to spend was 40.000 livres.¹⁶ In the end he bought eight paintings, two of which ended up in the famous collection of Gerret Braamcamp (1699–1771) in Amsterdam, while five works were destined for Wilhelm: the well-known Portrait of a Nobleman by Titian, Christ’s Bearing of the Cross, attributed to Da Volterra at the time, but to Giovanni Battista Franco (1498/1515–1561/1580) at present, The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, attributed to Jacopo Tintoretto (1518/1519–1594) at the time, but to Lodewijk Toeput (1550–1604) at present, Judith and Holofernes, ascribed to Guercino (1591–1666) (all in Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister), and The Holy Family by Andrea del Sarto (currently in St. Petersburg, Hermitage).¹⁷ Apart from acquiring the paintings at the sale, Hoet was also responsible for their transport, for which he had a crate made.¹⁸ The works finally arrived in Kassel via Frankfurt.

Although Tallard had also owned good North and South Netherlandish 17th-century paintings by artists such as Rembrandt, Rubens and Van Dyck, Hoet did not buy them. He chose Italian works instead. As mentioned before, Hoet and Wilhelm had purchased the majority of their North Netherlandish paintings in The Hague, Delft and Rotterdam, while a couple of outstanding South Netherlandish works had been bought in Antwerp. By 1756, Wilhelm had almost completed his collection, which comprised a great deal of Netherlandish masterpieces. Italian art, on the other hand, was less well represented.

Other German rulers, such as Frederick the Great (1712–1786), King of Prussia, had also sent their agents or middlemen to the auction rooms of Paris, and Russian, English and French collectors of means were represented as well. They were Wilhelm’s direct competitors at the Tallard sale and might have overbid him. Saint Cecilia by Rubens, for example, ended up in Potsdam because Frederick the Great paid the capital sum of 20,000 livres for it, half of Wilhelm’s budget.¹⁹