RKD STUDIES

In essence the 18th century in Sweden provides the same picture as do the other Scandinavian countries: the French approach replaces the Dutch one. This is most clearly seen in portrait painting. Even artists such as Olof Arenius (1700-1766) who, following on an apprenticeship with David von Krafft (1655-1724), spent six years in the Dutch Republic [1-2], and Johan Pasch I (1706-1769), who lived there from 1732 to 1734, hardly incorporated anything Dutch in their work. The Rococo decorations of Pasch are comparable to the playful pictures by Jacob de Wit (1695-1754), but this still does not make them Dutch in spirit.

Occasional copies after Netherlandish, mostly Flemish models do not count. Thus Lorenz Pasch II (1733-1805) is to have rendered an altarpiece after Cornelis de Vos (1584-1651) in Ekenäs (Finland) [3],¹ whereas the miniaturist Peter Adolf Hall (1739-1793) and others worked after models by Van Dyck and Mierevelt [4-5]. Carl Gustav Pilo (1711-1792) was an outsider insofar as his models were Rembrandt and the Venetians while French taste otherwise ruled.² But even with him, one can hardly speak of Dutch influence [6-7].

3
Lorenz Pasch (II)
The Lamentation of Christ, before 1797
Ekenäs (Finland), Tammisaaren Kirkko

The paintings of the fijnschilders Dou and Van Mieris are better reconcilable with the French taste of the time. In the 18th century we also encounter such traditional Dutch compositions as ‘Girl at a Window-sill’ or genre scenes by candle- or torchlight, done in Rococo colors, in France itself. The Swedish example for such a mixing of styles is Alexander Lauréus (1783-1823) (e.g., genre picture of 1818 in Stockholm) [8-9].³

Still-life painting continued to depend on Dutch models, both the trompe-l’oeil and the decorative flower piece. In Sweden, Carl Hofverberg (1695-1765) is a good example of the former approach (Hunting Equipment and Newspapers on a Wall, dated 1737, collection Countess E. Bielke, Stockholm) [10],⁴ whereas Lorens Lönberg (1726-1811) can paint a flowerpot which would do credit to Jan van Huijsum (1682-1749) or Herman van der Mijn (1684-1741) (Auction London 29.3.1928, no. 85, signed and dated 1771) [11]. Pehr Hilleström (1732-1816), who stopped off in the Dutch Republic on his way back from Paris, also betrays a Dutch conception in his still lifes and plain genre pieces [12-13]. An immaculate rendering down to the smallest detail is generally a Dutch trait.

The Dutch element in landscape painting was the same in Sweden as in Germany and France at this time, being inspired by the Both-Berchem group.⁵ Naturally these are not the only examples. Other foreigners probably have a much greater share in the overall picture. But when artists reached back to Dutch landscape forms at all, it was to those of the Arcadian landscape and not to the pictures of Jacob van Ruisdael and Allaert van Everdingen. The landscapes of Elias Martin (1739-1818) took over much of this Arcadian style [14-15]. Johan Philip Korn (1727-1796) continued the Saftleven-Griffier vedute (Uppsala University) [16-17].⁶

In later Classicistic landscape painting, reminiscences of Philip Wouwerman may occasionally shine through. Even in the 19th century there are Romantic landscapes (e.g. by Carl Johan Fahlcrantz, 1774-1861 and Alfred Thörne, 1850-1916) that resurrect Aelbert Cuyp’s sunlight or imitate Jan Both’s golden tone [18-20] – as in the Netherlands itself.⁷

10
Carl Hofverberg
Trompe l'oeil of a letter rack with duelling pistols, dated 1737
Stockholm, Livrustkammaren, inv./cat.nr. 16672 (68: 2)

11
Lorens Lönberg
Flowers in a carved vase, dated 1771
sale Vienna (Dorotheum) 1985-09-10/18, lot 468