# The Art of Painting > Johannes Vermeer - c. 1666-68 > Canonical HTML: https://iconotheca.com/artworks/johannes-vermeer/vermeer-the-art-of-painting-kunsthistorisches/ > Published by Servola Systems GmbH. Last verified: 2026-10-08 ## Tombstone - **Artist:** Johannes Vermeer - **Date:** c. 1666-68 - **Medium:** Oil on canvas - **Dimensions:** 120 x 100 cm (frame 152.5 x 133.5 x 10.5 cm) - **Object type:** Painting - **Period:** Dutch, seventeenth century - **Current location:** Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Gemaeldegalerie, Room XII. Property of the Republic of Austria. - **Attribution:** accepted ## Summary A 120 by 100 centimetre canvas of about 1666-68 in which Vermeer shows a painter at his easel, a model dressed as Clio, a wall map of the Seventeen Provinces and a brass chandelier crowned with the Habsburg eagle. It is the one picture Vermeer kept: within weeks of his death in 1675 his widow assigned it to her mother before a notary to keep it from his creditors, and the document calls it by the name it still has, The Art of Painting. Its trail after the Delft sale announced for 15 March 1677 is lost for about 126 years, until it appears in 1803 in the Vienna estate of Gottfried van Swieten as a work by Pieter de Hooch with a false signature, and then runs through the Czernin collection, where Waagen and Thore-Burger recognised it as a Vermeer about 1860. It was a famous picture that could not leave Austria. Between 1923 and 1938 dealers and museums were reported to have offered sums up to about USD 1.3 million; Andrew Mellon was the intended buyer of a USD 1 million option in 1936; and the Austrian monuments authorities never granted an export licence. On 4 October 1940 Count Jaromir Czernin sold it to Adolf Hitler for RM 1.65 million for the Linz museum. Recovered from the Altaussee salt mine in 1945, it was handed to the Republic of Austria and has been in the Kunsthistorisches Museum since. The sale is still disputed. Czernin claimed from 1945 that he had been pressured and was refused by the restitution commissions in 1949 and the Administrative Court in 1960. On 18 March 2011 the Art Restitution Advisory Board unanimously recommended against returning it to his heirs, finding no coercion and no persecution of the seller; the heirs' lawyer, Randol Schoenberg, rejected the finding and argued that the Board ignored his evidence. This record sets out the Board's published findings, the heirs' position and the points on which the sources disagree, from the 1677 sale date to the day Austria took the picture over in November 1945. ## Provenance Every link carries a grade. `documented` means a cited source supports it, `disputed` means the identification is argued but not established, `unknown` means we have no owner for that span and have not bridged it. - **c. 1666-68-1675** Johannes Vermeer, Delft `[documented]` (made and retained) Painted in the later 1660s (dates proposed run from 1662-65 to c. 1666-69; the Vienna museum says about 1666/68). That it stayed with Vermeer until his death in mid-December 1675 is inferred from the 1676 act that treats it as his widow's to assign, and the National Gallery says it apparently stayed in his possession. No document shows it was ever sold in his lifetime. - **1675-22 or 24 February 1676** Catharina Bolnes (1631-1687), Vermeer's widow `[documented]` (inheritance) Left a widow with heavy debts. On 10 February 1676 twenty-six other paintings, probably Vermeer's dealer's stock, had been transferred to the dealer Jan Coelenbier for 500 guilders in the name of a creditor, Jannetje Stevens. The Art of Painting was not among them according to de Visser. She was declared bankrupt on 24 April 1676. - **22 or 24 February 1676-1677** Maria Thins (c. 1593-1680), Vermeer's mother-in-law, by notarial transfer in The Hague `[documented]` (assignment to avoid creditors) The act, before the notary Johan Vos, calls it a piece of painting by her late husband 'in which was depicted The Art of Painting [De Schilderkunst]'. The estate inventory of 29 February 1676 did not list it. The curator of the estate, Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek (appointed 30 September 1676), judged the transfer illegal; Montias thought it at least curious. - **1676-1677** Estate of Johannes Vermeer under its curator Anthonie van Leeuwenhoek; Delft auction announced for 15 March 1677 `[disputed]` (impounding and announced auction) De Visser, following Montias, says Leeuwenhoek impounded the picture and posters announced a sale at the Guild of Saint Luke on 15 March 1677; Maria Thins protested by notarial letter on 12 March. The Vienna museum, de Visser and Essential Vermeer give 15 March; the National Gallery gives 15 May. No record of the sale exists, and neither its contents nor the outcome of the dispute is known. De Visser argues Thins may have stalled the sale by claiming as a preferred creditor, a status granted on 3 July 1679. - **1677-1803** Unknown `[unknown]` (gap of about 126 years) Nothing documents the picture for about 126 years, until the van Swieten estate of 1803. Lot 3 of the Dissius sale (Amsterdam, 16 May 1696), 'the portrait of Vermeer in a room with various accessories', sold for 45 guilders, may or may not be this picture. De Visser's suggestion that it passed through the notary Hendrick Terbeeck van Coesfelt, whose granddaughter married Gerard van Swieten in 1729, is explicitly a conjecture, and the route to Vienna in 1745 is set out in the next row. - **c. 1745-1803** The van Swieten family, Vienna: Gerard van Swieten (1700-1772), physician to Maria Theresa, and his son Gottfried van Swieten (1733-1803) `[disputed]` (descent (conjectured)) The National Gallery thinks a strong possibility that it reached Vienna early and was in Gerard's collection, and de Visser argues it arrived on 7 June 1745. The one firm point is that in 1803 it was in Gottfried van Swieten's estate, attributed to Pieter de Hooch and carrying a false De Hooch signature. - **1804 or 1813** Johann Rudolf Count Czernin von und zu Chudenitz (1757-1845), Vienna `[disputed]` (purchase) The Board gives 1804, from the van Swieten estate; the Vienna museum and the National Gallery give 1813. A diary note of his son Eugen Karl says he paid 50 florins in bad bank-billets; Swillens gave 30 florins; the German Kunst und Politik page says the seller was a Viennese saddler. The picture was thought to be by Pieter de Hooch. - **1804 or 1813-1845** Johann Rudolf Count Czernin `[documented]` (collection) Hung in his Vienna palace gallery under De Hooch's name ('Peter van Hooghe' on its frame label and in the gallery guide). The gallery was open to visitors by 1845 on one account and since about 1800 on another. Johann Rudolf died in 1845. - **1845-1925** The Czernin family, by descent within the Czernin entail (Fideikommiss) `[documented]` (descent) The sources name Eugen Karl Czernin (1796-1868) as the Count's son and say the Vermeer was incorporated with the gallery into the entail in 1862. Recognised as a Vermeer by Thore-Burger and Waagen about 1859-60. The intermediate holders are not named in the sources consulted. The entail holder Eugen Jaromir Czernin (1851-1925) died on 5 November 1925. - **1925-1932** Franz Jaromir Czernin (1857-1932), heir; estate litigated in Prague and Vienna `[documented]` (inheritance) Prague and Vienna courts both claimed the estate and the question whether the entail survived in Austria was litigated until 1932. Franz Jaromir died childless on 9 April 1932 and left his allodial estate to his nephew and adoptive son Eugen Czernin. - **1932 or 1933-4 October 1940** Jaromir Czernin-Morzin (1908-1966); a one-fifth interest or share of proceeds held by Eugen Czernin (1892-1955) `[documented]` (settlement of 23 February 1933) By the agreement of 23 February 1933, the Vermeer was to go to Jaromir Czernin with 20 per cent of the sale proceeds to Eugen, according to the Board; the National Gallery describes Eugen as holding one-fifth of the picture and Jaromir four-fifths, with a 1933 appraisal of nearly one million schilling. No export licence was ever applied for or granted. Offers from Duveen Brothers for Andrew Mellon, among others, are in the Board's findings; none produced a sale. - **4 October 1940-1945** Adolf Hitler, for the planned Fuehrermuseum, Linz (Sonderauftrag Linz); agent Hans Posse `[disputed]` (sale for RM 1.65 million) The transaction is documented in detail: purchase offer of 4 October 1940 accepted, entail court approval 25 October, payment confirmed 13 November, letter of thanks 20 November, inheritance duty RM 380,000. The Board (18 March 2011) found no coercion and no persecution of the seller; the heirs' lawyers argue the contrary. See the narrative for who holds which position. Linz number 1096a. - **1940-1945** Hitler's Linz collection, held in Munich; moved to the salt mine at Altaussee `[documented]` (storage) The Vienna museum and the National Gallery say moved to Altaussee in the winter of 1943-44; the Board says October 1944. Recovered there by US Army units in spring 1945. - **27 June 1945-late November 1945** Allied (US) authorities, Central Collecting Point Munich `[documented]` (recovery and custody) Received at the Collecting Point on 27 June 1945 (card 1284); listed as Austrian property with the Czernin family as presumed owner and the 1940 price noted. Escorted to Vienna by Andrew Ritchie in a private railway car. - **late November 1945-1952** Republic of Austria, deposited at the Kunsthistorisches Museum `[documented]` (handover) Handed to the Austrian federal government on 28 November 1945 (Board); the National Gallery and Essential Vermeer say 17 November 1945; the card says issued 27 November 1945; the museum's database says handed to the museum on 7 November 1946. Jaromir Czernin's claims were rejected in 1945-46 and by the restitution commissions in 1949. - **31 March 1952-present** Republic of Austria (the Federation), by forfeiture of Hitler's property `[documented]` (forfeiture) The People's Court declared the painting, as Hitler's property, forfeited to the Federation under the 1947 Property Forfeiture Act. Czernin's later applications were refused, the last by the Administrative Court on 30 June 1960. - **1958-present** Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna, Gemaeldegalerie, inv. 9128 `[documented]` (museum collection) Inventoried in late 1958 or early 1959. On 18 March 2011 the Art Restitution Advisory Board unanimously recommended against transferring it to the heirs of Jaromir Czernin. On view in Room XII. ## Auction results Hammer and buyer's premium are stated separately. Where a source conflates them this record says so. - **1696-05-16** Amsterdam, sale of the collection of Jacob Abrahamsz. Dissius (the Kunst und Politik page names Coelenbier; not confirmed elsewhere), - Estimate: Not recorded - Hammer: 45 guilders, if lot 3 is this picture - With premium: No buyer's premium is recorded in the sources - Lot 3 was described as 'the portrait of Vermeer in a room with various accessories, uncommonly beautifully painted by him'. Whether it is The Art of Painting is disputed: the German Kunst und Politik page supposes it is, Essential Vermeer notes that the price was scarcely twice that of the tiny Lacemaker in the same sale and that few experts think it corresponds to so large a canvas. The same sale offered twenty-one Vermeers. No sale of this picture at public auction is documented; the museum's provenance line records a Delft auction of 15 March 1677 but no record of that sale survives. ## Open questions - Was The Art of Painting sold at the Delft sale of 15 March 1677 (or 15 May, as the National Gallery has it), or was it withdrawn after Maria Thins's claim of 12 March? No record of that sale survives. - Where was the picture between 1677 and the first firm record in the van Swieten estate of 1803? Erik de Visser's chain through the notary Terbeeck van Coesfelt and a van Swieten marriage of 1729 rests on probability, and de Visser says he does not know how the painting came into the notary's hands. - Is lot 3 of the Dissius sale of 16 May 1696, 'the portrait of Vermeer in a room with various accessories' at 45 guilders, this painting? The German Kunst und Politik page supposes so; Essential Vermeer notes the price and size make it unlikely; no document settles it. - In what year did Johann Rudolf Czernin buy it, from whom and for how much? The Board says 1804 from the van Swieten estate; the museum and the National Gallery say 1813; a diary says 50 florins in depreciated notes and Swillens says 30 florins; the saddler is unnamed. - Who applied the false Pieter de Hooch signature, and when? Essential Vermeer says the eighteenth century and de Visser says it is unknown. The date MDCLXVI(I I?) reported after the signature is also not published in full, and it is not explained why the numerals were not restored when the signature was. - Did the heirs of Jaromir Czernin take any further step after the Board's recommendation of 18 March 2011, such as the arbitration Randol Schoenberg said he would propose? None was found in the sources consulted. - How was the RM 1.65 million actually funded? The Reich Chancellery's note of 25 April 1940 envisaged RM 1 million freed by the confiscation of the Oskar Bondy collection, and the Board's summary does not say which funds paid the price in November 1940. - When was the Linz-bound picture moved to Altaussee: the winter of 1943-44 (National Gallery, Vienna museum) or October 1944 (the Board)? And on what day did it pass to Austria: 17, 27 or 28 November 1945, or, in the museum's own database, 7 November 1946? - Is the picture in its original frame or a period one, and when was the present frame made? The museum gives the frame size only; no source consulted dates the frame. - What does the picture's insured or declared value stand at? No published figure was found; the 1936 USD 1 million draft option and the 1986 offer of ATS 60 million to buy it are the nearest public numbers. - Why did the Kunsthistorisches Museum decline to lend to the Rijksmuseum in 2023? The only source consulted reports the refusal and gives no reason. ## Sources - [1] National Gallery of Art, Washington, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, The Painting's Afterlife' (online catalogue pages, archived copy of 18 May 2016). Provenance from Delft to the 1958 Vienna inventory, the Czernin family, the 1933 appraisal, the 1935-40 negotiations, Altaussee, the 1945-46 claims. - [2] National Gallery of Art, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, Art and History' (archived copy of 18 May 2016). The map, the chandelier, Clio's trumpet, Bleyswijck's 1667 book. - [3] National Gallery of Art, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, The Art of Painting' (archived copy). The 24 February 1676 transfer and the wording of the act; Clio and her attributes after Ripa. - [4] National Gallery of Art, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, Painting and Illusionism' (archived copy). The mask, the tapestry, the camera obscura, Frans van Mieris's Pictura. - [5] National Gallery of Art, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, Technique and Conservation' (archived copy). Pinhole, ground, no compositional change, medium, Hubert Dietrich's conservation. - [6] National Gallery of Art, 'Vermeer: The Art of Painting, Vermeer of Delft' (archived copy). Short biography, the widow's petition of 1677. - [7] Kunstrueckgabebeirat (Art Restitution Advisory Board), Beschluss of 18 March 2011, Jaromir Czernin, 'Die Malkunst' (inv. GG 9128), 34 pp., unanimous; published by the Commission for Provenance Research, Vienna. Primary source for the findings of fact and the Board's reasoning (in German). - [8] Art Restitution National Fund of the Republic of Austria, 'Recommendations 2011': lists the 55th session of 18 March 2011 and the non-recommendation for Jaromir Czernin. - [9] Kunsthistorisches Museum, 'On the current state of the discussion of the provenance of Vermeer's The Art of Painting' (2010 exhibition page, archived copy of 2012). - [10] Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna, object database entry 'The Art of Painting', English page: dating, inventory, provenance line, room. - [11] Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Objektdatenbank 'Die Malkunst' (German page): dimensions, frame size, signature and map inscription, inventory number, provenance, similar items including the 1888-91 Loewy photograph. - [12] Erik de Visser, 'The Puzzle Solved? Notes on the Early Provenance of Vermeer's The Art of Painting', Essential Vermeer (documents of 1676-77 after Montias; the Coesfelt and van Swieten hypothesis; the 1804/1813 acquisition; the false De Hooch signature; Waagen and Thore-Burger). - [13] Jonathan Janson, Essential Vermeer, interactive catalogue entry 'The Art of Painting' (technical report, condition, dating table, exhibition list, 1696 sale, Monconys, Teding van Berckhout, the artist's costume, the mask, the chandelier). Secondary source compiled from the Vienna 2010 catalogue and other literature. - [14] Jonathan Janson, Essential Vermeer, 'Vermeer's Life' (marriage, Catholic circle, children). - [15] Interview with Jorgen Wadum, Essential Vermeer (5 February 2003; technique, ultramarine, output, the 1672 Hague expertise). - [16] Interview with E. Randol Schoenberg, Essential Vermeer (20 March 2011): the heirs' lawyer's account. A partisan source; every statement from it is attributed in the text. - [17] E. Randol Schoenberg, 'Will Austria part with Hitler's Vermeer?', Jewish Journal, 17 March 2011. Written by the lawyer for a claimant, a step-daughter of Jaromir Czernin; every statement from it is attributed in the text. - [18] ORF Oe1, 'Keine Rueckgabe des Vermeer-Bildes' (March 2011): the Board's decision as reported by APA, with Eva Blimlinger's statement and Schoenberg's reaction. - [19] Artforum, 'Austrian Family Seeks Return of Vermeer Sold to Hitler' (8 September 2009), reporting AFP and Der Standard: the heirs' attorney Andreas Theiss. - [20] CODART, 'Czernin family demands restitution of The art of painting by Johannes Vermeer from the Austrian government' (14 September 2009), citing Der Standard. - [21] Bendor Grosvenor, Art History News, 'Vermeer will not be restituted' (20 March 2011): price in reichsmarks and dollars at the time. - [22] Kunst und Politik project, 'Besitzfolgen' (provenance sequence of Vermeer's Malkunst, German; undated academic web page). Used only for the 1696 lot, 45 guilders and the saddler of 1813; the page gives the date of the 1696 sale as 16 March, while Essential Vermeer's provenance table and Wikipedia's article on Jacob Dissius give 16 May. - [23] Deutsches Historisches Museum, Datenbank zum Central Collecting Point Muenchen, Muenchner Nr. 1284 (Linz-Nr. 1096a): restitution card, 'De Schilder...', Jan Vermeer van Delft, receipt 27 June 1945, issue 27 November 1945. - [24] Monuments Men and Women Foundation, biography of Andrew Ritchie (escort of the Czernin Vermeer to Vienna in a private railroad car). - [25] Wikipedia, 'The Art of Painting' (tertiary source; flagged for replacement by the Vienna 2010 catalogue and Wheelock 1995, Liedtke 2001, Binstock 2013). - [26] Wikipedia, 'Johannes Vermeer' (tertiary source; used for the date of death, the studio inventory and the widow's petition, which the National Gallery also gives; flagged for replacement by Montias 1989). - [27] Austrian Science Fund (FWF), project P 22188 'The Czernin collection of Old Master paintings' (Imma Walderdorff): the Czernin gallery, Johann Rudolph Czernin and the 2012 volume 'Die verkaufte Malkunst'. - [28] CODART, 'New inventory of the former Czernin Gallery of Paintings published' (4 November 2015): Juffinger and Walderdorff's inventory; Loewy photographs of about 1900. - [29] Rene Livchen, 'Net Wages and Real Wages in Germany', International Labour Review (1944), Table I: gross weekly earnings of industrial workers, 39.89 marks in 1940. - [30] Wikipedia, 'Austro-Hungarian florin' (tertiary source): Wiener Stadt Banco notes fixed in 1811 at one fifth of face value in coin. - [31] Sonia Montrella, 'Vermeer mania', Mag 1861 (AGI), 12 February 2023: the Rijksmuseum exhibition and the Kunsthistorisches Museum's refusal to lend. - [32] Jonathan Janson, Essential Vermeer, 'Provenances of Vermeer's paintings' (table giving the Dissius sale, Amsterdam, 16 May 1696, with lot numbers). - [33] Wikipedia, 'Jacob Dissius' (tertiary source): the 16 May 1696 auction in Amsterdam offered 21 Vermeer paintings. --- Images on this record are public domain or CC0 and are hosted by us. No image on this site is generated or simulated. If you quote this record, quote the provenance grades with it.