Biography

Discussion

On 23 September 1839, the Tentoonstelling van Kunstwerken van Levende Meesters (‘Exhibition of Artworks of Living Masters’) opened at the Teeken-Academie (‘Drawing Academy’) on the Boschkant in The Hague. The exhibition had been held every two years—later every year—since 1808, alternating between Amsterdam and The Hague. It was one of the few opportunities for artists to exhibit their work. The number of entries submitted was therefore always high, consisting primarily of paintings. Prints, drawings and works produced in other techniques formed a small minority. At the 1839 exhibition in The Hague, at least three daguerreotypes were exhibited, all sent in by the Amsterdam painter Christiaan Julius Lodewijk Portman. While the accompanying exhibition catalogue does list a painting submitted by Portman—’Luther biddende voor den kranken Melanchton’ (‘Luther Praying for the Sick Melanchton’)—no mention is made of the daguerreotypes. These were perhaps added to the exhibition somewhat later. Where Portman’s daguerreotypes are in fact mentioned, however, is in a number of newspaper and magazine articles reporting on the exhibition. From these articles, as well as several of Portman’s own advertisements, one may conclude he was the first Dutch person to take photographs. The invention of photography had been announced shortly prior to this, on 19 August 1839, with the first public demonstration taking place in the following September.

The first notice of Portman’s photographic activity is an advertisement he placed in two newspapers, the Algemeen Handelsblad and the Amsterdamsche Courant, on 3 October [1839]. Under the heading ‘DAGUERROTYPE’, the text reads as follows: ‘The proofs of this important Invention have been made by the Undersigned in the company of several respectable Art experts and can be viewed daily from 1 to 3 o’clock at his home./ C.J.L. Portman, / Singel, across from the Appelmarkt, 437.’ On 4 October, a second notice followed in the Dagblad van ‘s Gravenhage (‘Newspaper of The Hague’), in which a portion of the text was repeated. The newspaper stated further: ‘Two of his proofs of the Daguerreotype, representing views of Paris, have been received from that city at this residence for the Exhibition, and can be viewed there.’ Four days later, the Algemeen Handelsblad placed the following text: ‘Mr. C.J.L. Portman asks that we announce that the proofs of Daguerreotype produced by his honourable self were not taken in Paris, but in our capital city [Amsterdam] at the Trippenhuis, at Felix Meritis, and at his own home, and that these pieces can still be viewed for a while daily, with the exception of Sunday, from 1 to 3 o’clock by everyone.’ On 16 October, a notice was placed in the Dagblad van ‘s Gravenhage, which as well appeared in the Algemeen Handelsblad one day later. It states that one of the daguerreotypes at the Tentoonstelling van Kunstwerken van Levende Meesters showed the Binnenhof in The Hague, seen from the Buitenhof: ‘This proof satisfies much more than the Daguerreotypes previously sent hither from Paris.’ The Nederlandsch Magazijn (‘Netherlands Magazine’) began an article—appearing in the issue of early November 1839—on the way in which daguerreotypes were made, with a reference to the proofs that could be viewed at Portman’s home, ‘consisting of several views of Amsterdam, of the building Felix Meritis and of the Museum [= the Trippenhuis, where the Rijksmuseum was located at this time].’ The magazine also stated that Portman was selling daguerreotype equipment. The Algemeene Konst- en Letterbode stated in its issue of 8 November: ‘The Dutch art-loving Public is indebted to Mr. C.J.L. Portman, Painter and Art dealer in Amsterdam, who here in this country is the first to have acquired the cameras of Daguerre, and has made the results produced with it accessible for public viewing at his home, as well as at the Exhibition of Artworks in The Hague, since several weeks. Among these, one rightfully admires a view of the Binnenhof in The Hague, acquired by Mr. Portman, during his stay there, by means of Daguerre’s device, and which in every way can compete with the original products of the inventor [= Daguerre].’ Finally, in the magazine De Beeldende Kunsten 1 (‘The Visual Arts’, 1839–1840), a highly elaborate discussion of the exhibition was concluded with the following observation: ‘The zealous Mr. Portman aroused widespread interest by exhibiting a light drawing [photograph], acquired with Daguerre’s device, which was commended for being extraordinarily successful.’

On 19 August of that same year, 1839, the invention of the daguerreotype was made known to the world at a joint meeting of the Académie des Sciences (‘Academy of Sciences’) and the Académie des Beaux-Arts (‘Academy of Fine Arts’). The French government purchased the invention and then released it to the public domain. Public demonstrations given by Daguerre in early September and the publication of an instruction manual made it subsequently possible for anyone to try out the new art. Portman is most likely to have travelled to Paris himself in order to acquire daguerreotype equipment: as far as is known, he was the first person to offer such equipment for sale in the Netherlands. Moreover, two of the daguerreotypes that he exhibited in The Hague are depictions of Parisian cityscapes. Obviously, these could only have been taken in the French capital. G.A. Evers, the first to research the early history of Dutch photography and who subsequently published a series of articles on the topic in 1914–1915 in the photographic magazine Lux, states that it was precisely because of the shots in Paris that Portman was discredited by others. Someone with base intentions had apparently accused Portman of having purchased the daguerreotypes in Paris, as opposed to having produced them himself. It was these allegations—in Evers’ view, professional envy—that had led Portman to taking shots in Amsterdam as well. All of Evers’ facts can be verified, with the exception of this accusation. Unfortunately, Evers fails to mention his sources: in most cases, these were notices in the newspaper. Accordingly, it remains unclear whether Evers actually had access to a source unknown to us, or instead, that he had drawn his own conclusions from something that was in fact never stated. Had there indeed been someone unable to equal the quality of Portman’s work— someone who, out of frustration, was determined to bring his integrity into doubt—then they remained completely silent on the matter from that point onward. The very next person known to have produced daguerreotypes in the Netherlands was Louis Lemaire, who is said to have returned to The Hague from Paris in the middle of November [1839] in order to demonstrate the process and sell equipment to the public. Considering that Lemaire was active in Belgium earlier that month, it is unlikely that he was the person who tried to cast a shadow on Portman’s reputation. None of Portman’s daguerreotypes have—as far as is known—been preserved, a fate that has also befallen the work of other pioneers of photography. Besides the aforementioned notices and advertisements, there is one other source that reveals something of his photographic activities. On 16 December 1839, Portman wrote a letter addressed to J.J.F. Wap (1806–1880), who was then an instructor of Dutch language, literature, historical, and geographical studies at the Koninklijke Militaire Academie (‘Royal Military Academy’) in Breda. The letter, which is found in the collection of the Rijksprentenkabinet (‘National Print Room’)/Rijksmuseum, reads as follows:

“Amsterdam 16 Dec 1839

Honourable Sir & Friend! / In haste I respond to your esteemed [letter?] of yesterday, that the Price of the Daguerreotype of Paris is Franc 425 [;] Packaging 10[;] Postage and ink rights 42-50[;] Francs 477-50[.] This is the highest quality. There is yet a second which costs approximately fr. 300 excluding postage and import duties. Both are signed by Giroux, and therefore inspected, by Daguerre himself. – Such a device includes 6 Plates [.] when one desires more, then it costs per piece francs 6[.] There is then an instruction manual with it. It was extremely pleasant to learn that the [sent?] proofs had been useful, and influenced the Society advantageously. I am extremely sensitive to Your kindness to allow me to have the important article from Le Journal de Pharm: copied for me [.] For now I wish to convey my genuine thanks for this. My unfortunate hand is nowhere near getting better [.] Writing is therefore extremely difficult for me[.] You will have to forgive me that I hereby add nothing more than the assurance of my venerable and genuine friendship

Your honourable servant & friend

PS I must still state that the inexpensive Cameras are smaller, therefore also the plates are much smaller [.] The galvanotype has stayed with me for a while, but Mr. Matthes here has made good prints [.] we are now going to have to apply it to Art[.]’

The prices for daguerreotype cameras stated in this letter correspond with those cited in the aforementioned article on daguerreotyping that appeared in early November [1839] in the Nederlandsch Magazijn. Here too it was remarked that Portman had undertaken the task of supplying such equipment. Alphonse Giroux was an instrument maker from Paris, who had assured himself of the direct support of Daguerre himself, who personally certified each and every daguerreotype camera that Giroux built. Because of Portman’s ‘unfortunate hand’, this letter—the earliest written on the topic of photography in the Netherlands—was necessarily brief. He hinted as yet at proofs that he had sent to Wap, which had apparently proven to be of use for an as yet unspecified society. The enterprise in question is the department of the Maatschappij tot Bevordering van Beeldende Kunst in de Nederlanden (‘Society for the Promotion of Visual Art in the Netherlands’) located in Breda, of which Wap was the most prominent founder. The society was founded in 1839, but was most likely shut down by as early as 1843. On 12 December (therefore four days prior to Portman’s letter), the Bredasche Courant states that the organisation’s department in Breda had held a ‘kunstbeschouwing’ (‘art viewing’), where a demonstration of the daguerreotype process had planned to be given by ‘the Talented Artist Portman’. In the end, however, Portman failed to attend and the new invention was not shown, though several of his daguerreotypes were indeed on display. Two days later—as a notice in the Bredasche Courant relates—two daguerreotypes were exhibited in a space above the coffee house of the ‘Widow Beekmans’ on the Grote Markt in Breda. These were probably also works produced by Portman. The article that Wap was so willing to have copied is certain to have been ‘Sur la découverte de M. Daguerre’ (‘On the Discovery of M. Daguerre’) by P.-A. Cap, which had been published in the Journal de pharmacie et des sciences accessoires 25 (1839), p. 725–731. The ‘galvanotype’ to which Portman refers in the post scriptum has nothing to do with photography. It concerns rather a method discovered in 1837 (galvanography) that facilitated the replication of printing forms (cast metal sorts, engraving plates, etc.). C.J. Mathes, who was later a professor in mathematics and physics, apparently carried out tests with this in 1839. The article in the Nederlandsch Magazijn is based on Daguerre’s own instruction manual, entitled Description pratique des procédés du daguerreotype (‘Practical Description of the Processes of the Daguerreotype’). It was first published separately and subsequently added to reprints of Daguerre’s more extensive and better-known instruction manual, Historique et description des procédés du daguerreotype et du diorama (‘History and Description of the Processes of the Daguerreotype at the Diorama’, Paris 1839), which were being reproduced with great haste. The piece begins and ends with the amicable mention of Portman’s name, whereas the rest consists of the daguerreotype process explained in a merely objective tone. One may therefore justifiably assume the text was in fact written by Portman himself (and published anonymously). Interest in the Netherlands was apparently deemed to be too insufficient to justify publishing the piece separately.

It is not known whether Portman viewed photography merely as an interesting experiment or that he expected a new source of income to come from it. In a letter in the possession of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (‘Royal Library’), dated 7 April 1840, Portman requests an interview with an unidentified addressee. He would prefer to meet the person ‘preferably not in the middle of the day, when I have sittings’. It cannot be determined from the letter whether the ‘sittings’ in question are in reference to a photographed or a painted portrait, as Portman is also known to have painted numerous portraits. An advertisement for the ‘Magazijn van Schilder en Teekenbehoeften’ (‘Warehouse of Painting and Drawing Supplies’), the company that Portman and his younger brother Lodewijk Anton (1804–1853) ran together, indicates that both were still involved in the business of supplying photographic supplies in 1843 (‘Silvered FLATTENED PLATES and CHLORURE D’OR [Gold Chloride] necessary for Daguerreotyping’). After the business was shut down in 1853, there is no photographic equipment listed in the auction catalogue of the business’ remaining possessions. It had been either excluded from the auction or Portman was no longer selling such items.

For Portman, photography was one of several (extraneous) activities. This was by no means unusual for painters: quite often they were unable to make a living from the painter’s brush. Starting in (at the latest) 1826, Portman had taken over the running of the store in painting and drawing supplies, together with his younger brother Lodewijk Anton, which their father had established in 1817. Around 1827, the two brothers also owned a lithographic printing company. Christiaan Portman had been taught the basic principles of drawing by his father, Lodewijk Gottlieb Portman, who was known above all as an engraver. In 1818–’19, he also received one year of instruction from the renowned portrait, genre, and history painter Cornelis Kruseman. Thereafter, he received tips from J.W. Pieneman, a painter as well celebrated for his portraits and history pieces. Portman himself had likewise chiefly worked in these two genres of painting, albeit with less success. Starting in 1820, he regularly submitted paintings to the annual Tentoonstellingen van Kunstwerken van Levende Meesters. The critiques were initially full of praise, but this was in part inspired by the prospect of his youth. In 1825, he was awarded the ‘groote prijs’ (‘great prize’) of the Koninklijke Akademie van Beeldende Kunsten (‘Royal Academy of Visual Arts’) for his entry of a painting with the (prescribed) theme Adam en Eva bij het lijk van Abel (‘Adam and Eve at the Body of Abel’). The prize also included membership to this Amsterdam institution. In later years, he would prove to be less fortuitous. Even though Portman had experienced no major success as a painter, he was not without prestige. He was in fact one of the founders of the Amsterdam artists association Arti et Amicitiae (‘Art and Friendship’), acting as well as the society’s secretary in the years 1840–1842. In 1841, he was also the secretary of the Amsterdamsche Commissie tot oprigting van een Standbeeld van Rembrandt (‘Amsterdam Committee for the Erection of a Statue of Rembrandt’; not until a decade later was a statue actually produced).

Around 1842, Portman’s painting career appears to have reached an impasse. Up until this time, he had submitted work to the Tentoonstellingen van Kunstwerken van Levende Meesters virtually on an annual basis; after this time, only three times. In 1842 or 1843, Portman moved from Amsterdam to Beverwijk, and in 1844, to Alkmaar. There he met his fellow colleague, Marinus Jacobus Stucki, who wrote in a letter to the artists biographer Kramm: ‘these days he doesn’t paint, but during the previous year living in Beverwijk, he still painted several portraits (for pleasure), and I think, that he’ll do that here as well.’ Portman is likely to have painted his final portraits in 1847 (the last known portrait dates from this year). When, in 1850, he deregistered from the civil registry of Alkmaar in order to move to Haarlem, he stated that he had no source of income. Perhaps his second wife, whom he married in 1845, was financially secure: the marriage certificate states that he has no specific profession. In the middle of the 1840s, Portman was as yet involved in a number of reclamation projects in the tip of the province North Holland. In 1849, he acquired a patent for the duration of five years on ‘liquid erasing/erasure blue for linen and other white fabrics’. He is also said to have been responsible for bringing ‘Portmans poetspommade’ (‘Portman’s Polishing Pommade’) out on the market. The exact nature of this product remains unknown.

After Portman moved to Kleve, Germany, in 1851, and his brother died in 1853, their company in painting and drawing supplies was shut down. As early as 1851, the paintings owned by an anonymous ‘art-lover’ were put up for auction. When considering the large number of works by Portman that were included in the sale (more than forty), and the timing of the auction just prior to his going abroad, one may conclude that Portman was the owner. After a number of years in Kleve, Portman then settled in Paris in about 1856. (From this year onward, the annual reports of Arti et Amicitiae list Paris as his place of residence. The renowned ‘Lexicon van Scheen’ states 1859 as the year of Portman’s moving, but Scheen has been mistaken on more than one occasion.)

All that is known of this time spent abroad is that, in 1860, Portman submitted a plan to the Amsterdam city council together with an attorney, Willem Karel van der Breggen, to connect the Oosterdoksdijk and Westerdokdijk to each other by means of a dike, as well as to expand the city on the side of the IJ River The dike was to receive an ‘enormous’ lock ‘precisely in the middle where the present Damrak or an extension of it’ would allow ships to pass through. On the newly created terrain, an eastern and a western primary canal were to be built, both beginning at the Damrak. Canal houses and warehouses were to be constructed on the remainder of the terrain was to be built for. The capital required amounted to approximately 8 million guilders. The concession that they had requested was not granted; today, the Amsterdam Central Station stands at the location where they had planned to put their dike. In 1868, Portman left Paris to visit the Netherlands. On 18 October, he passed away at the home of his brother-in-law, J.P. Kool.

Portman is one of many artists who, whether for a shorter or longer period, became involved in photography. He took up the camera at a time when it had just barely been introduced. Not until 1842 did photography gain a foothold in the Netherlands. It would still take another one-and-a-half to two decades before one or more permanent studios had been established in every Dutch city. As a painter, Portman was second-rate. His paintings and drawings preserved in museum collections have all been permanently designated to the storage depots. When considering their quality, this is rather understandable. In the history of Dutch photography, however, Portman’s role is much more prominent: he is, as far as is known, the first Dutchman who photographed. It is therefore all that more ironic when one considers that a wide array of Portman’s paintings has been preserved, but not a single photograph—that is, no known daguerreotypes can be attributed to his name.

Documentatie