PAINTINGS morceau de toile manquant au-dessus de la de au-dessus manquant toile de morceau de toile a été inséré pour remplacer un grand tés remon puis découpés été ont personnages deux les passé, le dans donné moment un À indéfini. et sombre fond un sur détachent se qui David, de et Saul de nature grandeur figures les représente controversé tableau ce 1660, années des probablement Datant l’état et la construction originelle du tableau. concernant éléments nouveaux de apporte à la qui du collection appartient Mauritshuis, dif de l’atelier de , L’étude récente (2007–2010) d’un tableau tar Résumé spatial incoherence between thefigures. historical interpretation and help explain the art the for implications have findings These overpainted. extensively is curtain the that and figures two the between join the along missing indeed is canvas of strip vertical a that shown has analyses cross-sectional and counting thread automatic involving search re canvas.This of pieces separate ten than fewer no of consists now painting The sert. in canvas a with David of head the above canvas missing of piece large a replacing reassembled,and attime same the apart cut were figures two the past the in point some At background. dark nondescript a against portrayed David and Saul of figures life-size the depicts painting controversial this 1660, around from date to Considered struction. con original and painting’scondition the about information new important provides David – painting workshop Rembrandt late a of (2007–2010) investigation Recent Abstr matic thread counting Hauser,Alois changes, format Keywords: *Author for correspondence [email protected] University,Rice Houston, USA Don H.Johnso [email protected] Cornell University, USA C. RichardJohnson,Jr. [email protected] The Hague, The Netherlands Mauritshuis Royal Picture Gallery Annelies v [email protected] The Hague, The Netherlands Mauritshuis Royal Picture Gallery Petria Noble*

; en même temps, un nouveau morceau nouveau un temps, même en ; – in the collection of the Mauritshuis Mauritshuis the of collection the in – a ct Rembrandt, an L restorationhistory, oon grounds, Saul and David, Saul and Saul David overpaint, overpaint, Saul and and Saul auto ------, David with a piece of canvas cut from another painting. In 2007, technical (h. piece large a replacing time same the at join, notched unique a using at reassembled since and apart strange cut were so painting the in not figures two the is past the in point This some unanswered. remained curtain, the of particularly preservation, of the state good less regarding the and dimensions questions original important of number a 149–165), 1978, al. et though the painting had been studied very thoroughly in the 1970s (Figure (De background dark a nondescript against portrayed David and Saul of figures life-size the depicts painting controversial this 1660, to date from around Considered 602). 1969, (Bredius scholars Rembrandt no other painting that has generated such differences of opinion amongst Hague, Since the art historian, Horst Gerson dismissed the Introduction linen, 126×158cm (original canvas); 130.5×164.5cm(stretcher). Nosignature, nodate. Rembrandt and/orStudio of, Figure 1

Mauritshuis) from Rembrandt’s oeuvre in 1969 there is probably

53 x w. 51 cm) of missing canvas above the head of of head the above canvas missing of cm) 51 w. x 53 Saul and David andDavid Saul (c.

1660), Mauritshuis inv.1660), Mauritshuis no. 621 /Bredius no. 526,oilon of theMa from thecollection of Rembr investiga Technic Saul andD andt and/or studio al tion of uritshuis

Saul and David avid, c. 1660,

1). Even Even 1).

Vries (The

1 PAINTINGS figuras. las entre espacial incoherencia la explicar a ayudan y artística y histórica interpretación la para implicaciones tienen averiguaciones Estas repintada.ampliamente está cortina la que y figuras, dos las entre unión de línea la de largo lo a lienzo de vertical tira una falta efectivamente, que, mostrado ha tigráficos, automático de hilos y análisis de cortes estra conteo un conlleva que investigación, Esta lienzo. de distintos trozos diez menos al por compuesto está cuadro el Actualmente tela. de injerto un por David de cabeza la sobre faltaba que tamaño gran de lienzo de trozo un tiempo mismo nuevo,al remplazandode figuras fueron recortadas, separadas y unidas dos las momento algún En genérico. oscuro fondo un sobre retratadas David, y Saúl de de 1660, representa las figuras a tamaño real alrededor fechada obra, controvertida Esta construcciónoriginal.su cuadroy del estado novedosael sobrey importante información proporciona Mauritshuis del colección la de cuadro del taller de Rembrandt, Investigaciones recientes (2007–2010) de un Resumen entre lesfigures. contribuent à expliquer l’incohérence spatiale et l’art de l’histoire de plan le sur tableau du l’interprétation modifient découvertes Ces ges, et que le rideau a été largement repeint. personna deux les entre raccord de ligne la de long le manquante effet en est verticale transversale, a montré qu’une bande de toile automatique des fils et des analyses de coupe décompte le sur repose qui étude,Cettecés. rapié toile de morceaux dix de moins pas aujourd’hui réunit tableau Le David. de tête Saúl y David,Saúl - - -

a combination of new and existing technical information: an assembly of an assembly information: technical existing and of new a combination would also help shed light on the attribution. The it present study relied that on hope the in restoration eventual to prior painting the of condition true the understand to order in initiated was picture the of examination Rembrandt). Until 1863:Coll. Mrs. Abel Vautier (widow SaintMarc), December 1863,Paris, Caen, auctioned lot31(as Until 1835:Coll. deSaintMarc, Didot Paris. May Paris, 1830,Caraman auction, lot76asRembrandt, “T. h.45p. l. 67.” Prior to 1830:Coll. Victor-Louis-Charles (1762-1835),DukeofCaraman, deRiquet Vienna andParis. Provenance 2005:128-131) (Bikker T conservators was formed to evaluate the findings. and curators specialists, Rembrandt of consisting commission a picture, the of importance and complexity eye the naked Given the stereomicroscope. with the and painting the of examination and samples, paint of (SEM-EDX) analysis X-ray spectroscopy with energy-dispersive coupled (XRF) measurements, light microscopy and fluorescence X-ray handheld reflectography, infrared counting, thread X-rays dating from the 1970s, new HR scans of the X-ray films, automatic 1946: Bredius bequestto Mauritshuis Leningrad 1936] 1898: Coll. (1855-1946), The Hague[on loanto exhibited Mauritshuis; Moscow/ Chicago September 1893,no. 27;exhibited Amsterdam 1898, no. 118] Durand-Ruel,1890-1898: Dealer Paris andNew York [exhibited Georges1890?: Dealer Tambour, Ay nearEpernay Before 1890:Coll. Philippe George, Ay nearEpernay Bourgeois,Dealer Cologne Coll. Baron von Cologne Oppenheim, Albert 1876[exhibited Cologne 1876] Bourgeois,Dealer Cologne Stevens Arthur (1825-1900),ParisDealer Durand-Ruel,Dealer Paris About 1870 :Coll. Fébure, Paris “Toile.- H.1m.31c., L.1m.64c.” Until (1819-1869),Paris, 1869:Coll. April Alphonse 1869, Paris, Oudry auctioned lot52 (asRembrandt). Subsequent restoration of the painting in Berlin one year later by the the by later year one Berlin in painting the of restoration Subsequent a ‘regeneration cure’ by The Hague restorer, W.A. Hopman (1828–1901). or four least five times. at A short notice in the treated been have must picture the that deduced be can it itself, painting the from evidence physical and catalogues auction the in listed dimensions with together 1903, and 1898 between newspapers Dutch the in appeared that articles numerous From Bredius. to sold was it when painting the owned who Durand-Ruel, of archives the in or files Mauritshuis the in either found be to picture the of no records are conservation There picture. the of history treatment early the about known is Nothing1946. in Hague Thein Mauritshuis the to bequeathed later and of auction Paris Caraman the (Table1830 in 1). acquiredpaintingbyThewas 1898AbrahamBrediusin occurs painting the of mention First Provenance ndtre able 1 tment history Dagblad of Rembr of 15 November 1898 refers to The World’s Congresses

scanning scanning electron microscopy of Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio 1 of theMa al investiga avid, , Instituteof The Art uritshuis c. 1660, tion

2

PAINTINGS 1899, where removal of a thick 100-year old varnish is referred to. In In to. referred is another article from varnish the old 100-year thick a of removal where 1899, numerous newspaper accounts, including the in mentioned is (1857–1919), restorer,Hauser German Alois renowned after Hauser’s restoration. by Bruckmann dated Munich 1904, which presumably shows the painting a photograph including (RKD), Institute History Art Netherlands the and or who owned the painting at that time. A number of other early photographs Sardnal and dating from c. 1895 comes from the of archives Durand-Ruel, stretcher bar. Paris/New York, in 1894 and 1895 are attached to the centre of the upper down before 1830. 1830 sale catalogue also shows that the picture must already have been cut dates (Table 1). The height 120 of cm approximately listed in the Caraman the painting must have been fashioned into its current format between those dimensions listed in the 1869 and 1830 auction catalogues indicates that dowel joints for both corners and cross bars. tenon with moldings softwood wide have typically stretchers his since painting being lined in France in the 19th century, rather than by Hauser, to point the edges, covered and the paper canvas lining the linen with fine joints of the cross bars of the seven-membered softwood stretcher, along characteristic neat chamfering along the outer rear edges and the dovetail is in een neutralen toon bijgeschilderd […painted in a neutral tone]’. gave the modern insert in the upper right cornerHauser its that present dark stated tone: is ‘… it Hague, The to returned picture the day the 1900, strips are butt-joined and are held in place by means of the lining canvas. canvas. lining of the by means in These place held are and edges. butt-joined are strips lower and right upper, the to added also been have strips join. of kind same the using painting old an from cut canvas of piece a with replaced was David of head the above canvas missing of piece large a time, same the At cm). every removed was canvas original and 1830 1869,using aunique notched join (where approximately 1square cm of between reassembled then and apart cut were painting the in figures two the past, the in point some At preserved. is figures two the of height that the relative indicating both figures, through passes the middle, below cm 7 now selvedge), to selvedge (sewn seam horizontal original the Furthermore, width. same the been have probably would but cm, 55 linen of the Saul segment measures 71 cm in height and the bottom section of piece upper The cm. per threads warp (13.5–15) 14 x weft (13–15) 14 of density average an David with linen and weave plain Saul identical: is of painted are figures the which on linen the that indicate (RKD) Importantly, manual thread counts carried out together with Michiel Franken (Figure of canvas pieces of ten separate is now comprised the painting that clear makes films) (24 assembly X-ray the of examination Detailed Original construction Technic héliogravures al ex 4 The earliest known photograph of the painting taken by by T. taken painting the of photograph known earliest The of the painting are preserved in the Mauritshuis archives archives in the Mauritshuis are of preserved the painting amin Two paper Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant tion 5

labels applied by the dealer Durand-Ruel, Durand-Ruel, by the dealer applied labels of Rembr Residentiebode 3 of Moreover, the difference in difference the Moreover, Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga ,

dated 22 February avid, of 14 October uritshuis c. 1660, 6 Narrow tion 2

The

2). 2). 3

PAINTINGS side ofthejoin. ofthejoin,isnotvisibleat therightthe left consisting ofseveral doublethreads, seenat the figures. Here aweave faultinthelinen of thenotches inthejoinusedto rejoin resolutionHigh detailofX-ray showing one Figure 3 16 cm wider than it is now. The X-ray also reveals traces of original of traces reveals also X-ray now.The is it than wider cm 16 some being as listed is painting the 1830 of catalogue auction Paris the in since significant, is This 3). (Figure figures two the between missing continue to the right not of thedo join, that proving that threads a section double of canvas several is indeedof consisting faults weave of series a reveals X-ray seam in of the along the the vertical high notches resolution lower edge at the left, as that of the insert. Furthermore, close examination and upper the at strips the for used was linen same the that and David of figure the below or above either from sections canvas missing the from originatesright the at edge lower the at strip added the that known now narrow strips possible using newly developed software. the paint surface, 16 bit grayscale) made automatic thread counting of with the 1:1 dpi, (600 X-ray the of scanning resolution High visible. clearly is additions later these of ground) (and linen differentX-ray, the the In F.insert, X-ray ofthewhole(assembly24films). The addedstripsare labelledA,B, C,D, Eandthelater added Figure 2 trimmed a few cm suggesting a possible original format of c. 145 x 180 180 x 145 c. of format original possible a suggesting cm few a trimmed well, while at the left and top edges the appears to painting only have as been edge bottom the at amount similar a by and figures, two the between join vertical the along cm 18 as much as possibly reduced, been has original format. As a result, it is now possible to itsconclude that of the pictureevidence new important provide David, of figure the containing right lower of canvas and segment on the edge tacking top original (flattened) the and the edges, along marks bar strainer as such X-ray, the in discernedbe automaticcanfeaturesthethreadcountingthat Otherdata. bygenerated 4) (Figure maps angle weave (warp) horizontal and (weft) vertical novel the in visualised clearly is edges three on cusping of depth The cm). 10 top: and cm 18 right: cm; 15 (left: sides three on tensioning of Rembr of Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga 7 As a result, it is avid, uritshuis c. 1660, tion

4

PAINTINGS of the original format is given in Figure 5. middle. the inA seamreconstruction horizontalpossible the with likely 73 cm (corresponding to 1 of c. strip-widths horizontal of two constructed been have therefore must painting The cm. 164 x 130 c. of format present the to compared as cm, Figs. 3 and5). weave anglemap(notillustrated) shows andJohnson2010, onlycuspingat theupperedge(Johnson Vertical (weft) weave anglemapshowing strong andright edges. cuspingalongleft The horizontal (warp) Figure 4 represent its original size. Computer reconstruction of Figure 5 Saul andDavid Saul ell , a standard 17th-century strip-width), most , showing itspossibleoriginal format. The dashedlines of Rembr 8 of Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga avid, uritshuis c. 1660, tion

5

PAINTINGS very different as compared to the age cracks elsewhere, for example in in example for elsewhere, cracks age the to compared as different very appears area this in craquelure the eye, naked the with even however, Unfortunately, the X-ray gives very little information about the paint layers; T particle suggesting the use/admixture of paint residues, possibly from the Kassel earth), bone black, yellow earth, organic lake, and a single vermilion little smalt, a number of other pigments, including organic brown (possibly two cross-sections also identified, in addition to lead white, umber and a spot measurements of individual pigment particles in the upper ground of EDX 674–675). 2005, (Groen umber and white of lead mainly composed grounds having 1660s and 1650s the from workshop Rembrandt’s from paintings of group a into ground of type this places Groen Karin umber. and white lead more proportionally containing layer grey/brown lighter second a by followed smalt, little a with umber and white lead fine and The ground comprises two layers: a lower darker layer consisting of coarse Grey-brown doubleground as follows: background. paint samples were extracted from carefully selected areas of the curtain and In order to precisely determine the nature of the overpaint, several minuscule Paint sampleanalyses these pigments in IR. the original paint contains more red earth/smalt due to the reflectance of where affordedoriginal is layers paint original underlying with contrast More in layers. paint black of use the by hampered is reading clear a although figures, two the between overpaint of extent the clear make to be authentic. Examination with digital infrared reflectography (IRR) helps brightest red parts of the curtain, close to the figure of Saul, do appear to The losses. old manythe into flows in paint the since originalfolds not are of curtain majority the depict to used brushstrokes brown reddish the that reveals stereomicroscope the with Examination figures. two the including 1660 around from dating paintings Rembrandt other of grounds the in foundbeen have residues paint similar sincenoteworthy palette. is This of Saul, and in the upper left background, a first brown layer containing containing layer brown first a background, left upper the in and Saul, of figure the to close curtain, the of areas lit In µm). (50-100 thick notably paintallsamplesfromoriginalpainting.inthe areasof Theselayersare identified were layers sketch/undermodelling painted black and Brown Brown andblackpainted sketch layers workshop. the in applied was it that imply would ground of type this Moreover, 510). 2005, al. Vanet Wetering 82; de 2008, Mottin Paul St. as possibly three paintings from the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, he question ofthecurtainandextent ofoverpaint Self-portrait at the easel , 10 Young Capuchin Monk YoungCapuchin The build-up of the curtain/background can be summarized 9

(1660) (Museé du Louvre, Paris) and and Paris) Louvre, du (Museé (1660) and of Rembr Denial of St Peter St of Denial of Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga avid, uritshuis Self-portrait (Ducos and and (Ducos c. 1660, tion

6

Technical investigation of Rembrandt and/or studio of Saul and David, c. 1660, from the collection of the Mauritshuis

organic brown (Kassel earth?) and fine earth pigments was identified, while in the areas from the curtain further in the background and close to the figure of David, a darker mixture that also contains bone black, chalk and a little red lake was demonstrated. In some places only the ground appears to be present. These sketch layers are for the most part covered by the thick surface paint, but are visible in losses.

Original curtain/background

The samples from the original curtain/background revealed one or two compact brownish paint layers on top of thick dark brown underlayers (Figures 6 and 7). The colour and composition of the top paint layer varies slightly depending on the location: warm brown in the upper left background, while in the area/curtain between the figures the paint is red to purplish brown in colour. In these areas, mixtures of bone black, and/ or Kassel earth, red/yellow earth pigments, chalk and small additions of smalt and red lake were identified (SEM-EDX). The admixture of lakes and smalt in the dark paint layers is considered characteristic for paintings from Rembrandt’s workshop. In samples from between the two figures, the presence of smalt in the top layer indicates a purplish red glaze that now appears to be largely lost/abraded. The trace elements arsenic, iron, nickel and aluminium present in the smalt particles were found to be consistent with trace elements normally detected in 17th-century smalt.

The build-up and composition of these dark layers bears striking similarity for instance, with the dark background in Portrait of Margaretha de Geer (c. 1661) in The National Gallery, London (Bomford et al. 2006, 176–77). It is notable that in all the paint cross-sections from the original areas of the curtain, at least one, and sometimes two thin intermediate fluorescing layers (varnish?) are discerned, suggesting several campaigns of working. Visually similar, thin fluorescing layers have been identified, for example in Rembrandt’s Homer (1663) in the Mauritshuis.

Figure 6 Cross-section 621 × 11 from original curtain Overpainted curtain (red highlight) near nose of Saul, → 74.8 ↓38 cm in normal light. Distinguishing the overpaint from the original paint layers proved to be

Figure 7 challenging given that it contains similar pigments to those in the original Cross-section 621 × 11 from original curtain paint. Interpretation was facilitated by comparison with paint cross-sections (red highlight) near nose of Saul, from areas of the curtain close to the figure of Saul, considered to be → 74.8 ↓38 cm in UV light. authentic, as well comparison with paint cross-sections from the insert Figure 8 and a restored area at the upper edge, where the overpaint extends over a Cross-section 621 × 05 from overpainted curtain (reddish brown brushstroke), fill. A cross-section from the overpainted curtain close to the join reveals close to vertical join the pigments bone black, chalk, red earth and vermilion pigments in the ← 64.3 ↓43.7 cm in normal light. red top layer (SEM-EDX), along with traces of cadmium, possibly from a modern pigment or drier (Figure 8). On top of the ground traces of a reddish brown paint layer containing smalt and red earth (SEM-EDX) can be interpreted as possible remains of the original paint layer. The pigment composition of the red top layer is similar to that in a sample

7 PAINTINGS (Figures smalt and earth red lake, red of comprised and compact more is it where authentic, be to considered curtain the of part the from sample the in that taken from a location that is clearly restoration, and completely different to The Van Gogh Museum. at Stive Frans by scanned generously manual were the X-rays The of counts. thread task laborious the in assistance his for and Franken samples Michiel paint the of discussion insightful her for Gifford Melanie especially contributions, and time their for commission the of members investigation of the The generous support of NIBC is acknowledged for making the technical Acknowledgements picture. the of attribution the on light more shed to order in out carried be will technique painting the to attention particular treatment, noteworthy.the also During is subject same the of smalt and lakes, as well as the close association containing with layers paint drawings translucent dark by the of Rembrandt composition The pictures. the unusual ground with that in other late Rembrandt/Rembrandt workshop of the was in picture given painted the Rembrandt’s similarities workshop of the attribution which is picture, still much it debated, seems that certain the picture was directed at the curtain between the two figures. As to the Gerson’sof much thatnoteworthy is ofcriticismIt figures. the between of the incoherence and the spatial overpaint explains the curtain extensive figures two the between canvas of strip missing The build-up. material and history restoration its appearance, original painting’s the regarding Technicalinvestigationlightsignificantinformationbroughtto newhas of technic C removed. been has overpaint the once will made be that decision a discussion, to subject still is edges, left and bottom the from the strips with lost along possibly the two figures, between linen of strip missing the adding by also format original to its (closer) returned picture the and replaced be should insert the whether to As original. the of that with structure in similar linen of piece new a with insert large the of replacement involve may treatment Subsequent removed. be will treatment due to start in the beginning of 2011, the varnish and overpaint the of phase first the In surface. the of proud slightly stands and canvas original the than V th/cm) H x 16/17 (12 structure in finer is painting old an from cut is which insert The features. disfiguring very are overpaint and insert added joins, prominent the condition present its In state. ideal from far in aesthetically is it sound, structurally is painting the Although Proposed trea onclusions andrthistoric 6 and 7). al reserch Saul Saul and David tment possible. The authors would like to thank al implic of Rembr of Technic Saul andD from thecollection andt and/or studio of theMa a al investiga tions avid, uritshuis

c. 1660, tion

8

PAINTINGS 1 Notes Bikker, J. References 10 9 8 7 6 5 2 674–675. Dordrecht: Springer. Winkel, de M. and Veen der van J. P.Klein, Groen, K. by contributions with Wetering In contemporaries. his Groen, Benedict Leca, 72–92. Cincinnati: Cincinnati Art Museum. Louvre’sthe on Duco London: Phaidon. Bredius A., Art in the Making Bomford, and London: Yale University Press. 4 3

Preserved in a book of newspaper clippings, Digital IRR, July 2009. Grateful thanks to the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam for lending lending for Amsterdam Rijksmuseum the to thanks Grateful 2009. July IRR, Digital Contact with the Developed by Rick Johnson (Cornell University) and Don Johnson (Rice University), University), (Rice Johnson Don and University) (Cornell Johnson Rick by Developed FOM-AMOLF Amsterdam, 2009–2010. 2009–2010. Amsterdam, FOM-AMOLF at Noble Petria and Loon van by Annelies Netherlands) The elemental Tilburg, (EDAX, for analysis system EDAX an with Netherlands) The Eindhoven, (FEI, microscope electron vacuum high SFEG XL30 a on out carried were analyses SEM-EDX section. IR spectrum to 1700 nm. in penetration a has camera This Instruments). Opus (Osiris-A1, camera infrared their from the vertical join (De Vries et al. 1978, 149). much of the height and width had been lost and that no more than a few cm were missing people.ece.cornell.edu/johnson/. http:// See painting. a across density thread canvas in variations detail to algorithms processing Amsterdam signal of use Museum makes and (TCAP) Gogh Project Van Count Automation the Thread the and between collaboration from arose software this Netherlands. The and France in paintings 19th-century in identified been has lining with combination in joins zig-zag of use The join. unusual this of examples other revealed not have world the around museums major and Paris in the in specified not are paintings Mauritshuis Annual Reports. actual The 1908. and 1898 between collection the (http://www.durand-ruel.fr). 2008 May communication, personal Durand-Ruel, Archives Durand-Ruel, Flavie and The 16 November 2007. For Hauser methods and materials also see Mandt (1995). communication, personal Berlin, Gemäldegalerie, Stehr, Ute to thanks grateful canvas personal communication, 16 May 2008. For comparison with Hauser’s stretcher and lining Labreuche, Caroline Villers Research Fellow 2007–2008, The Courtauld Institute of Art, Mauritshuis Archives. Director of the Mauritshuis, Emilie Gordenker. as of well as du Director and the (former the Louvre) Frits Duparc Mauritshuis), present of Technical Documentation, RKD), Martin Bijl (private restorer), Blaise Ducos (Museé Art, Washington), Karin Groen (Rembrandt Research Project), Michiel Franken (Curator of Gallery (National Gifford Melanie University), Nijmegen Volker(Radboud Manuth The paint samples were embedded in polyester resin and polished to reveal a cross- a reveal to polished and resin polyester in embedded were samples paint The De Vries, Tóth-Ubbens and Froentjes concluded it was not possible to ascertain how how ascertain to possible not was it concluded Froentjes and Tóth-Ubbens Vries, De in paintings important photograph to Mauritshuis the by contracted was Bruckmann For information regarding 19th-century French stretchers grateful thanks to Pascal Pascal to thanks grateful stretchers French 19th-century regarding information For Members of the commission are (Rembrandt Research Project), Project), Research Weteringde (Rembrandt van Ernst are commission the of Members assss s, B., K. on these labels refers to the value of the painting: 50,000 francs. Paul-Louisfrancs. 50,000 painting: the of value the to refers labels these on 2005. 2005. Tables of grounds in Rembrandt’s workshop and in paintings by by paintings in and workshop Rembrandt’s in grounds of Tables 2005. and D and ., J. Self-Portrait at the Easel the at Self-Portrait , 166–177. London: The National Gallery. B. Centre de recherche et de restauration des musées de France Willem Drost: a Rembrandt pupil in Amsterdam and Venice

H. Gerson. Kirb Mo Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings IV:Paintings Rembrandt of Corpus ttin. y, A. Roy, A. 2008. An icon of the Rembrandt myth: recent discoveries 1969. Rembrandt: The complete edition of the paintings. . In . Rüger, Rembrandt: Three faces of the master the of faces ThreeRembrandt: Knipselboek of Rembr and of Technic

Saul andD R. White. ,

from thecollection

The Self-portraits The 1885–1927, pp. 19, 32, 31A, 31A, 32, 19, pp. 1885–1927, andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga avid, 2006. uritshuis c. 1660, . New Haven Rembrandt, , E. van de de van E. , tion (C2RMF)

, ed. ed. , 9

PAINTINGS Johnson, 13th IEEE DSP Workshop, Marco Island, Florida and Johnson, Self-portraits. Knipselboek David. Unpublished report, The Thread Count Automation Project (TCAP). v Wetering, Vande In De Conservation Department, Mauritshuis. results of Rembrandt and/or Studio of, Saul and David, MH inv 621. P.,Noble Tijdschrift, format. original determining for examination technical and No von Gemalden”. Mand Archives. der an Rembrandt in the Mauritshuis b Vries, A.B.,

E. le, P. t Hendrik , P. Radboud University Nijmegen, 16(2): 29–33. 2009. Altered formats of Rembrandt paintings: 1995. Alois Hauser d.J. (1857–1919) und sein Manuskript “Uber die Restauration Veen, and Dordrecht: Springer. D D .H., .H., Zeitschrift fur Kunsttechnologie und Konservierung [Book of newspaper clippings] 1885–1927, unpublished, Mauritshuis unpublished, 1885–1927, clippings] newspaper of [Book A. v A. M. Tó s. C.R Johnson, Jr., A.G. and . de Winkel. de M. 2009. A thread counting algorithm for art forensics. In an

th-Ubbens, Jr. Johnson C.R E., L oon. with contributions by contributions with , 148–165. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff. 2010. 2005. and

Overview of cross-sections and SEM-EDX SEM-EDX and cross-sections of Overview W. Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings IV:Paintings Rembrandt of Corpus , 679–684. Klein, W.A. Sethares, of Rembr Froentjes. 2010. Thread count report: Saul and Saul report: count Thread 2010. of Technic Saul andD

, P.Groen, K. Use of documentary evidence Use evidence of documentary from thecollection Desipientia Kunsthistorisch Kunsthistorisch Desipientia andt and/or studio of theMa al investiga 1978. Saul and David.

Unpublished report, report, Unpublished 9(2): 215–231. avid, uritshuis c. 1660, Proceedings Proceedings , J. Klein, tion H. ee, Lee,

The The 10