Rachel Ruysch (Gemini, 1664 – 1750) was one of the most celebrated flower still life painters of the Dutch Golden Age. Her innovative fusion of botanical realism with imaginative composition helped shape the flower still life genre. Art historians still consider Ruysch to be among the most talented and influential still life artists of all time. Her artistic vision and career success broke down barriers for women artists who followed.
Table of Contents
Developing Her Signature style
Rachel Ruysch learned how to observe and record nature from her father, botanist, physician and anatomist, Frederik Ruysch. In 1679, at 15, she apprenticed with Amsterdam’s prominent flower painter, Willem van Aelst, which was a rare opportunity for a woman at the time. There, Ruysch began to develop her own style. By 18 she was producing and selling independently signed works.
The Dutch Golden Age (17th century) was a period of unprecedented economic growth. A rising middle class fueled demand for paintings and Ruysch quickly established a domestic and international patronage for her signature style.
Ruysch’s playful, asymmetrical compositions had a distinctly Rococo flair. Other Dutch flower painters at the time composed their works in a more formal Mannerist style. The flower-obsessed Dutch society were smitten. She masterfully wove together flowers, insects, and fruit from across continents and growing seasons in paintings teaming with abundant life.
Composition in Details
Ruysch merged scientific realism with imagination, creating ecosystems that could have never existed beyond her canvases. Flowers across continents and growing seasons were brought together in imaginative ecosystems. She referenced developments in botanical research taking place the time, including rare specimens in her works. For example, she was one of the first Western painters to include cacti in her still lifes.
Many of her works include intricate details that reveal themselves upon closer inspection – insects and butterflies crawling on flowers, architecture half-glimpsed in shadowy backgrounds, heavy drooping buds, insect-bitten leaves, marching ants, and fruit in stages of decay.
Some elements of her flower still lifes were akin to the Dutch still life known as a vanitas, scholars doubt that was her intention. A true vanitas painting emphasizes the inevitability of death, whereas Ruysch’s paintings express a pure appreciation for the beauty of life unfolding.
“She neither conformed simply to the predominant conventions of allegorical floral still-life in the period nor to those of scientific illustration, yet participated in both.”
-Art Historian Marsha Meskimmon
LifeSTYLE & Career
In 1693 she married Amsterdam portrait painter Jurigen Pool and they had a large family of ten children. Ruysch continued working throughout her marriage, which was uncommon for women at the time.
In the early 1700s she became the first female member of the artist’s society, Confrerie Pictura, in The Hague and began producing large flower works for an international circle of patrons. Her paintings were sold for prices as high as 750–1200 guilders in her lifetime, nearly twice the price of Rembrandt’s.
From 1708 to 1716 Ruysch was appointed court painter to the Elector Palatine, Johan Willem, in Düsseldorf. Upon returning to Holland, Ruysch continued painting her coveted flower still lifes for a prominent clientele.
Despite changes in the popularity of flower paintings, Ruysch’s reputation never waned. She remained artistically active until a few years before her death, inscribing her age 83 on one of her final canvases. When she died in 1750, eleven poets paid her their respects with poems about her. Art historians still consider her to be among the most talented floral still life artists of all time.
