Provenance
After the Geelvinck family ceased to exist in the early 19th century, the traces to the real origins were lost. The Swiss family Tschiffely sold the painting in 1832. In the end of the 19th century it was known as depicting the Familie des Kaufmanns Gelfing. In 1907 the known Dutch art-historian Hofstede de Groot mentioned the parrot in the painting of the Familie Geelvinck. Remarkably he described the painting as langweilig (= boring). In 1984 also Bob Haak describes it as depicting the Geelvinck family.
In 1976 Van Eeghen renamed the painting to De familie van burgemeester Gillis Valckenier, and dated it in 1657. This was mainly based on the bird in the painting, which van Eeghen imagined to be a falcon. Irene Groeneweg reasons that the bird, held by the boy, is a Cuban Amazon parrot. Another reason to doubt the classification is that, according to the Amsterdam City Archives, burgomaster Gillis Valckenier had only three children at the time of the paintings creation.
Judith van Gent discovered that there was a resemblance with Hinlopen's on the works of Bartholomeus van der Helst and the family, depicted by Metsu on the painting in Berlin. Additionally she discovered support for her view in Hinlopens will. Nevertheless the painting is still and erroneously referred to as: The Family of burgomaster Gillis Valckenier.
Read more about this topic: Portrait Of The Family Hinlopen