According to Sutton in the collection catalogue, the last figure in the date could be a 3 or a 7 -- so the date should be 1613 or 1617.
As noted by Ertz, there is a related drawing in Leipzig, Museum der bildenden Kunste, inv. #NI.465a. It exactly copies the present composition and was, Ertz feels, not a preparatory study but a copy after the painting. Ertz vol. 1, p. 170. I agree with that assessment.