A CORPUS OF PAINTINGS Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project

A CORPUS OF REMBRANDT PAINTINGS

V SMALL-SCALE HISTORY PAINTINGS Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project

A CORPUS OF REMBRANDT PAINTINGS

ERNST VAN DE WETERING

with contributions by JOSUA BRUYN, MICHIEL FRANKEN, KARIN GROEN, PETER KLEIN, JAAP VAN DER VEEN, MARIEKE DE WINKEL

with the collaboration of MARGARET OOMEN, LIDEKE PEESE BINKHORST

translated and edited by MURRAY PEARSON

with catalogue entries translated by JENNIFER KILIAN, KATY KIST Frontispiece:

V 19 A woman wading in a pond (Callisto in the wilderness), 1654 London, The

Of this edition a limited number of copies have been specially bound and numbered. Subscribers to the complete special bound set will receive subsequent volumes with an identical number.

This is copy number

Disclaimer

This is a publication of the Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project. The opinions expressed in this volume (V), and the previously published volumes I-IV in the Series A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, should be understood as “opinions” that are meant for academic use only. The opinions represent the Foundation’s best judgment based on available information at the time of publication. The opinions are not statements or representations of fact nor a warranty of authenticity of a work of art and are subject to change as scholarship and academic information about an individual work of art changes. Opinions have been changed in the past according to new insights and scholarship. It should be understood that forming an opinion as to the authenticity of a work of art purporting to be by Rembrandt is often very difficult and will in most cases depend upon subjective criteria which are not capable of proof or absolute certainty. Therefore, the conclusions expressed in the volumes are only opinions and not a warranty of any kind. Third parties cannot derive any rights from these opinions. Neither the Foundation, nor the members of its board, nor the authors, nor the cooperators, nor any other parties engaged in the Rembrandt Research Project accept any liability for any damages (schade), including any indirect or consequential damages or losses and costs. Anyone is free to disagree with the opinions expressed in these volumes. We are grateful for the help of René J.Q. Klomp (Stibbe Lawyers, ) and Ralph E. Lerner (Sidley Austin Brown & Wood Lawyers, New York).

Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project Published by Springer, A CORPUS OF REMBRANDT PAINTINGS V P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, the www.springeronline.com © 2011, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be ISBN 978-1-4020-4607-0 (this volume) reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in ISBN 978-94-007-0191-5 (limited numbered edition) any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number 82-18790 of the publishers.

Typesetting – Pre Press Media Groep bv, This work has been made possible by the financial support of Zeist, the Netherlands the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), Printing – Ter Roye printing company the (UvA), Essilor Benelux, Booz & Oostkamp, Belgium Company, DSM and a number of benefactors who wish to Binding – Binderij Callenbach van Wijk, remain anonymous. Nijkerk, the Netherlands Contents

preface IX Catalogue bibliographical and other abbreviations XVI Catalogue of the small-scale history and genre paintings 1642-1669 by Rembrandt and his pupils Essays V 1 Rembrandt Chapter I Susanna and the Elders, 1638/1647. towards a reconstruction of rembrandt s art theory , Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, ’ 3 Gemäldegalerie 325 The advantage of the small-scale paintings 3-6 The basic aspects (de gronden) of the art of painting 6-10 V 2 Pupil of Rembrandt (with intervention by Rembrandt) From Van Mander to Rembrandt to Van Hoogstraten 10-14 (free variant after V 1) Confusions over the meaning and purpose of Van Mander’s and The toilet of Bathsheba, 1643. Van Hoogstraten’s treatises 15-28 New York, N.Y., The Metropolitan Museum of Drawing 29-34 Art 343 The proportions of the human body 35-48 Posture and movement of the human figure 49-52 V 3 Rembrandt Ordonnance and invention 53-64 Christ and the woman taken in adultery, 1644. Affects 65-70 London, The National Gallery 355 Light and shadow 71-80 Landscape 81-88 V 4 Rembrandt Animals 89-97 The Holy Family, 1645. Drapery 98-102 St Petersburg, The Hermitage Museum 371 Colour 103-112 Handling of the brush 113-123 V 5 Pupil of Rembrandt Space 124-128 The Holy Family at night, 1645/46. Towards a reconstruction of Rembrandt’s art theory 129-140 Amsterdam, 379

Chapter II V 6 Rembrandt or pupil an illustrated chronological survey of rembrandt’s The Holy Family with painted frame and curtain, 1646. small-scale ‘histories’: paintings, etchings and a selection Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie of drawings. with remarks on art-theoretical aspects, Alte Meister 389 function and questions of authenticity 141 For a Table of contents of this Chapter (including reattributions) 146-147 V 7 Rembrandt and pupil Tobit and Anna with the kid, 164[5/6]. Chapter III Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Gemäldegalerie 405 rembrandt’s prototypes and pupils’ production of variants 259 V 8 Rembrandt and pupil Joseph’s dream in the stable at Bethlehem, 164[5]. Appendix 1 Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, an illustrated survey of presumed pairs of rembrandt’s Gemäldegalerie 411 prototypes and pupils’ free variants 262 V 9 Rembrandt Appendix 2 Abraham serving the angels, 1646. a satellite investigated 271 U.S.A., private collection 418

Appendix 3 V 10 Copy after Rembrandt’s (lost) Circumcision [1646]. two nearly identical variations on rembrandt’s 1637 Braunschweig, Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum 427 THE ANGEL RAPHAEL LEAVING TOBIT AND HIS FAMILY in the 276 V 11 Rembrandt The Nativity, 1646. Chapter IV München, Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, on quality: comparitive remarks on the functioning Alte Pinakothek 435 of rembrandt’s pictorial mind 283 V 12 Pupil of Rembrandt (free variant after V 11) Chapter V The Nativity, 1646. London, The National Gallery 447 more than one hand in paintings by rembrandt 311 V 13 Rembrandt Nocturnal landscape with the Holy Family, 1647. Dublin, National Gallery of Ireland 457

V 14 Rembrandt The supper at Emmaus, 1648. Paris, Musée du Louvre 465

vii contents

V 15 Pupil of Rembrandt (free variant after V 14) V 26 Pupil of Rembrandt(?) The supper at Emmaus, 1648. Christ and the woman of Samaria 1659[?]. Copenhagen, Statens Museum for Kunst 479 St Petersburg, The Hermitage Museum 607

V 16 Unknown painter (free variant after V 14) V 27 Rembrandt or pupil The supper at Emmaus. Jupiter and Mercury visiting Philemon and Baucis, Paris, Musée du Louvre 489 1658[?]. Washington D.C., The National Gallery of Art 613 V 17 Rembrandt or pupil The prophetess Anna in the Temple, 1650[?]. V 28 Rembrandt Edinburgh, National Gallery of Scotland 495 Tobit and Anna, 1659. Rotterdam, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen 621 V 18 Rembrandt The risen Christ appearing to Mary Magdalene, V 29 Rembrandt ‘Noli me tangere’, c. 1651. Esther and Ahasuerus, [1660?]. Braunschweig, Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum 507 Moscow, Pushkin Museum 635

V 19 Rembrandt V 30 Rembrandt A woman wading in a pond (Callisto in the The Circumcision in the stable, 1661. wilderness), 1654. Washington D.C., The National Gallery of Art 647 London, The National Gallery 519

V 20 Rembrandt (with later additions) Corrigenda et Addenda 659 , c. 1655. New York, N.Y., The 535 Indexes V 21 Rembrandt A , 1655. index of paintings catalogued in volume iv Paris, Musée du Louvre 551 Present owners 660 Previous owners 661 V 22 Rembrandt (with additions by another hand) Engravers 662 Joseph accused by Potiphar’s wife, 1655. indexes of comparative material and literary Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, sources Gemäldegalerie 563 Drawings and etchings by (or attributed to) Rembrandt 663 Paintings by (or attributed to) Rembrandt 665 V 23 Pupil of Rembrandt (free variant after V 22) Works by other artists than Rembrandt 667 Joseph accused by Potiphar’s wife, 1655. Literary sources 669 Washington D.C., The National Gallery of Art 577 concordance 671 V 24 Rembrandt and pupil Christ and the Samaritan woman at the well, [1655]. New York, N.Y., The Metropolitan Museum of Art 585

V 25 Pupil of Rembrandt Christ and the woman of Samaria, [1]65[9]. Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Gemäldegalerie 597

viii Preface

This preface can perhaps best begin by explaining the properties and stylistic characteristics of Rembrandt’s rather puzzling title of the present Volume: ‘The small- works seemed, after all, to change only gradually and to scale history paintings’. follow a logical development. Was it therefore not best to In such paintings the figures were as a rule represented follow that development? Our work on Volume II, which full length and engaged in some kind of action in a more was for a large part devoted to the many portraits that or less clearly defined interior or exterior spatial setting. Rembrandt painted between 1631 and ’35, taught us This demanded of the painter not only insight into com- however that there were specific advantages in working plex compositional problems, but also an understanding of with a larger group of paintings, in which Rembrandt had the possibilities of light and shadow, and the skill to render worked from very similar pictorial starting points. For the appropriate gestures and affects. He had to have a example, we learned that in his rendering of the anatomy thorough knowledge of the relevant Biblical or mytholo- and lighting of the face, in the treatment of the back- gical stories and the associated costumes and other access- ground or in his handling of contours and contrasts, Rem- ories. Moreover, he had to be a competent painter of brandt developed certain ideas, which he then often modi - landscapes, architecture, still lifes and animals. In short, fied, together with skills that were in part rooted in these the painter of such works in Rembrandt’s time was con- ideas. The insights thus gained also allowed us to avoid sidered to be an all-rounder. But it was also expected of confusing Rembrandt’s works with those of pupils or other him that he would be both inventive and possessed of a associates involved in the production of portraits, or with powerful visual imagination. Producing a history piece, in later fakes or imitations. That, after all, was the aim which fact, was considered the most demanding challenge that a the Rembrandt Research Project had set as its priority. painter could undertake. This experience with the early portraits was one of the Unlike , for example, Rembrandt seldom had main reasons, following a methodological reappraisal of occasion to paint history pieces on a life-size scale. One the whole project between 1989 and ’93, for changing to a can in fact best get to know Rembrandt as an all-round thematic approach.1 It gradually became clear to us that painter through his c. 75 small-scale history pieces, for it with this thematic way of working we could get closer to would seem that he deliberately chose this type of paint- Rembrandt’s way of thinking and working in the face of ing in order to develop further his abilities as an artist specific artistic challenges. Initially we thought that these immediately after his period of apprenticeship. By insights were no more than an interesting spin-off from analysing these works, therefore, one gets closest to Rem- our research on authenticity, but this spin-off became brandt’s ideas about a number of fundamental aspects of increasingly important as an additional tool in the order- the art of painting. ing and sifting of the relevant part of Rembrandt’s oeuvre. In Volume IV, devoted to his self-portraits, we tried to On a more limited scale we had already had this experi- understand the figure of Rembrandt in the representation ence in working on the first three volumes. Thus, work on of his own appearance and how he saw himself in relation Volume I produced insights into Rembrandt’s use of mate- to his major predecessors and among those art lovers rials, painting technique and workshop practice. In the interested in his work. In the present Volume we approach Volumes II and III our insight developed into Rem- Rembrandt as an artist most intimately through an analysis brandt’s teaching and the workshop production linked to of his many small-scale history pieces (and the small it. But with the thematic way of working in Volumes IV group of genre pieces which are in many respects related and V there opened up much wider vistas that needed to to them). be explored if we were to get a grasp on the relevant field The compilation of an oeuvre catalogue – which was of Rembrandt’s activities. In the work on the self-portraits, originally the ultimate objective of the Rembrandt for example, this led to the realization that we also needed Research Project – is not in the first place a matter of get- to include in our investigation the etchings and drawings ting to know Rembrandt as man and artist but rather of that Rembrandt had produced before the mirror if we ordering and describing his painted oeuvre. However, in wanted to understand Rembrandt’s exceptional pro- the work on these last two Volumes of the Corpus the the- duction of self-portraits and the great variety of functions matic approach to this oeuvre proved to have great advan- of these works in their full compass. It was only through tages. Not only has our knowledge of hitherto often this integral approach that the realization dawned that unknown aspects of his work been enormously enriched, others in Rembrandt’s workshop were also producing ‘self- this approach also turned out to serve the original goal of portraits’ of Rembrandt, an advance in our understanding the Rembrandt Research Project in ways that were wholly in which a key role was played by research methods of the unexpected. physical sciences to identify the relevant works. At the project’s inception it seemed obvious that one What then are the fruits in the present Volume of our ought to deal with Rembrandt’s paintings in the chrono- investigation of the small-scale history pieces? logical sequence of their origin. But because of the multi- The cataloguing of the oeuvre, naturally, had to take faceted nature of Rembrandt’s production, that meant precedence in this Volume too. The second half of the treating very different types of paintings all mixed to- book comprises 30 often very extensive catalogue texts gether. Thus a portrait could follow a landscape which in turn followed a history piece which succeeded a self-por- trait and so on. And yet initially there was much to be said 1 A detailed account of this reorientation can be found in the Preface of Vol. for the chronological way of working: both the material IV and on www.rembrandtresearchproject.org ix preface

relating to the small-scale history pieces that originated That first chapter began as an attempt to explain why after 1642, including, for instance, the disputed Polish the small-scale history pieces have been taken as the theme Rider. In Volumes I-III the paintings designated as authen- of this Volume. The potential significance of this theme, tic works were incorporated in Category A, while the however, only became fully apparent during the work on works disattributed from Rembrandt were separated else- the chapter. When it did, the result was to suggest an alter- where in the book in Category C and those works whose native way of analyzing Rembrandt’s works, wholly differ- attribution remained uncertain in a Category B. In Vol. ent from the stylistic approach that had led to so many dis- IV and V all the works of the relevant kind that originat- attributions that were now, in retrospect, no longer ed in Rembrandt’s workshop were chronologically dealt tenable. But the writing of that part of the book was so with regardless of whether or not – or only partially – they unpredictable that Chapter I only came to assume its title were executed by Rembrandt. This integrated treatment and the focus of its purpose during the writing of it. The of all the works of the group under investigation gave rise piece began, as it were, to write itself. I must, however, to a far more subtly differentiated picture of the activities offer my excuses to previous authors who have written on in Rembrandt’s workshop. This in turn indicated that a Rembrandt’s presumed theory of art (or lack of it) for the more penetrating investigation was needed of Rem- fact that I could pay no more attention to their work. brandt’s teaching and the workshop practice that we had It will no doubt surprise some that the study of docu- previously assumed. For this reason, in the present ments which provides the foundation to this chapter is Volume attention is paid to the phenomenon of the free restricted to only two 17th-century texts. This deliberate variants produced by pupils after prototypes by Rem- choice was not merely dictated by the pressures of time, it brandt. Such ‘satellites’, we assume, were produced by was mainly determined by my desire to stay as close as pupils in the context of their training but also as an integ- possible to Rembrandt’s language and likely conceptual ral part of the production of saleable paintings, the pro- apparatus. I consider the usual collation of all the con- ceeds of which augmented the master’s income (see cepts and ideas that were ‘in the air’ in a particular period Chapter III). We anticipate that this phenomenon will to be an approach that obfuscates rather than clarifies our lead to further new insights in the wider context of 17th- understanding. century painting in general. As in Volume IV, here too it was decided, albeit in a The comparison of Rembrandt’s prototypes and the rather late stage, to include in the book the etchings and pupils’ variants based on them proved to be a unique drawings with histories. But this was a totally different opportunity to gain insight into the way Rembrandt undertaking from the inclusion of etchings and drawings thought as an artist. Such comparative analyses in Chap- with self-portraits in Volume IV. It meant that more than ter IV clarified specific characteristics of Rembrandt’s pic- a hundred etchings and many drawings with histories (and torial considerations and the criteria of quality based on some genre scenes) had to be given a place in the survey in them. In the wider perspective, these new insights could Chapter II. Rembrandt’s painted histories could in this well be important for Rembrandt research and the investi- way be placed in the context of his entire oeuvre in this gation of Dutch 17th-century painting in general. This in area. This turned out to be a major – in fact the great – itself is of interest because the factor of quality is usually challenge, but it offered at the same time exceptional dismissed as having no place in a scholarly art history and opportunities. therefore plays only a diffuse role in the work of art histo- Unfortunately the world of Rembrandt research is rians – and consequently with the interested public. largely compartmentalized according to the three media The small-scale history pieces that originated between that Rembrandt used, the RRP being constrained to the c. 1624 and 1642 were all dealt with in the first three vol- paintings. In view of the extent of Rembrandt’s oeuvre of umes. Nevertheless, there was good reason to look at these histories it is of course impossible for us to deal with the paintings once again, if only to be able better to relate the etchings and drawings with the same thoroughness as the paintings after 1642 to these earlier works. Moreover, a paintings. For problems of detail we could always count considerable number of problems had arisen over the on the advice of the pre-eminent specialists, Peter Schat- attribution of these earlier works. Where a reassessment of born for the drawings and Erik Hinterding for the etch- these paintings had led to changing our opinion over their ings, but desirable as it may have been it was at this stage authenticity, the arguments articulating these new insights of the Rembrandt Research Project no longer feasible to needed to be presented to the relevant art world. Rather mount an interdisciplinary project. However that may be, than describing these changes in attribution in a section of the way in which the works in the three media are integ - ‘Corrrigenda and Addenda’, as in previous volumes, it rated and discussed in Chapter II is entirely the responsi- was decided in this Volume to include the re-attributions bility of the present author. in a survey of all the small-scale history paintings that we Bringing together the histories created by all three tech- consider to be autograph (see Chapter II) and to account niques in a roughly chronologically ordered pictorial atlas for our changed thinking there. Indeed, the number of re- gave us – and we hope will also give many a user of this attributions is so great that they are given special attention book – a new understanding of Rembrandt as artist. By in a section below in this Preface (see Reattributions). This systematically clustering the relevant reproductions on consideration at the same time provides the background two (sometimes a multiple of two) pages, there emerge to the decision to devote Chapter I of this Volume to what clear patterns in Rembrandt’s activities that have seldom is referred to as Rembrandt’s ‘theory of art’. previously been recognized. One can regard the survey in x preface

Chapter II as a biographical sketch of Rembrandt’s think- This proposition – formulated by Josua Bruyn, the first ing and exploring both in the workshop and also – as will chairman of the Rembrandt Research Project – is become apparent – in the domestic circle during the ‘long remarkable in that it clearly implies that it is the investigator winter evenings’ (see p. 219). who determines which characteristics are significant in the Anyone looking through Chapter II will note that the work to be investigated. One has to imagine that the inves- etchings are as a rule reproduced in mirror image. This tigator makes a selection from the characteristics distilled decision requires justification. After all, some may find it a by him from a group of paintings – in this case Rem- disturbing experience, but one can argue that, for anyone brandt’s oeuvre – on the basis of which either to who wishes to understand Rembrandt’s pictorial thinking, determine the place of a particular work in the develop- this was for the one time a very useful decision, since ment of an artist or to decide whether that work falls in or Rembrandt as inventor thought on the plate, and not on outside that artist’s oeuvre. the (reversed) image of the print made from it. A defence This same conception of stylistic analysis is to be found of this decision is argued – convincingly, one hopes – in slightly differently worded, for example, in the article on the introduction to the chapter and from time to time in style published in 1963 by J.S. Ackerman, in which he the course of the chapter itself. writes: ‘Because our image of style is not discovered but It is important for the user to realize that in the concise created by abstracting certain features from works of art texts in Chapter II no attempt has been made to achieve for the purpose of assisting historical and critical activity, in any respect a complete or even a balanced treatment of it is meaningless to ask, as we usually do, “What is style?” all the works reproduced there. The chapter is, as already The relevant question is rather “What definition of style said, not much more than a tri-medial pictorial atlas that provides the most useful structure for the history of art?”’2 is intended to give to the user of the book a new insight What is remarkable about this approach to the phenome- into the ‘workshop’ of Rembrandt’s mind as a history non of style – an approach accepted and practised since painter. But it is also a first attempt to apply, whenever the early 20th century – is that it gives no ground to the possible, the insights gained in Chapter I in the examina- actual choices and objectives of the artists concerned tion and ordering of these works – particularly the paint- when deciding which should be the distinguishing charac- ings. Also in Chapter II, the often neglected question of teristics of their work. It rejects the idea that the choices the raison d’être of the works shown is repeatedly raised and and aims of the works’ author need be discovered. It is sometimes answered. rather the investigator who ‘creates’ the relevant set of It will be clear to the reader, one hopes, that while the characteristics ‘by abstracting certain features’, which can Chapters I and II cannot claim to be more than sketches subsequently be of use in the ‘historical and critical activ- they are nevertheless more than mere by-products of the ity’ of the art historian. investigation of authenticity, even though one finds little In this context it is important to point out that stylistic trace of their influence in the catalogue texts, most of criticism, specifically through the influential work of which were written when the work on these chapters was Heinrich Wölfflin (1864-1945) was based on a set of crite- first begun. The sympathetic reader, however, may still ria that was developed independently of the image in any consider them the fruits of the thematic approach adopt- concrete sense: that is, independently of the combination ed in 1993. of actual entities – things and figures – depicted in a painting. It was rather a matter of the ‘Vie des formes’ (the Reattributions Life of Forms), an expression coined by Henri Focillon (1818-1943), who thought along similar lines as Wölfflin. It may cause some surprise that the survey in Chapter II It is telling, and Wölfflin himself recognized as much, contains eight reattributions of paintings that were disat- that the developments of this stylistic analytical approach tributed from Rembrandt in the first three volumes of A – ran parallel to developments in the visual arts of the Corpus. In several of these cases, an account is given in the time – specifically the path to abstraction and the birth of relevant texts of how these regrettable disattributions expressionism, in which it was assumed that the artist and came about (see pp. 154, 160, 168, 180, 191, 196, 206 and his pictorial language coincide. The conception of style 220). entertained by the early Rembrandt Research Project was The very first sentence of the first chapter of the first implicitly characterized by the model that was still widely volume of A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings contains the ker- held in the early 1960’s, that the stylistic development of nel of the main explanation for the change of mind with- the artist would occur involuntarily, almost as a natural in the Rembrandt Research Project concerning the attri- phenomenon which manifested itself more strongly the bution of so many paintings. That sentence was a greater the artist. It was seen at that time to reflect a lack methodological statement to which the present author ful- of integrity on the part of an artist if he deliberately ly subscribed at the time. The relevant chapter is titled The changed his style – unless that change could be considered stylistic development and contains a stylistic analysis of the as an evolutionary one. The only artist in whose career paintings that Rembrandt produced in Leiden. The state- such changes (after his cubist phase) were indulgently tol- ment reads: ‘The style characteristics one assigns to a work of art comprise a selection of observations and inter- pretations which is made with a particular purpose in 2 J.S. Ackerman, ‘Style’, in: Art and archeology, ed. J. S. Ackerman and R. mind.’ Carpenter, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1963, p. 165. xi preface

erated was Picasso, but then he was considered – also by analysis. He was so convinced of the universal validity of himself – as a kind of genius child at play. this approach that he also wanted to apply this method, It will be clear that these two factors together form a for example, to Indian art. When, in the course of my dangerous mix: on the one hand the liberty of the art his- research, I actually did this the results proved to be non- torian to extrapolate from the work of an artist such fea- sensical. In fact, fieldwork conducted at my request by tures of style as he or she considers characteristic (on the specialists in the local folk art turned out to deliver basis of his own preconceptions) and on the other hand autochthonous categories by which the observed stylistic the assumption of an autonomous process of develop- and the qualitative features concerned could be properly ment in an artist’s style. The researcher or connoisseur understood.4 This may seem a far-fetched case to com- could arrogate to himself the role of determining in retro- pare with that of the Rembrandt Research Project, but spect how the artist ought to have worked and on this basis the specific – if not actually alien – nature of 17th-cen tury discard a work from that artist’s oeuvre. This mix becomes thinking on the art of painting is just as strange as (at least even more explosive in Rembrandt’s case when the one facet of) the 20th-century folk art of Rajasthan, which researchers’ intentions are focused on reducing the num- is partly rooted in the sophisticated Moghul culture. ber of paintings attributed to him. This latter tendency Thinking about the art of painting in Rembrandt’s time is was understandable in the context of the forces that had much more about the things, figures, effects, textures of been operating in the art world. Specifically, the great and materials and based on a clearer interplay between form growing demand for paintings by Rembrandt (notably in and content – and above all on the visual illusion – than the United States) had led to a concomitant expansion of the Vie des formes tending towards abstraction and expres- his oeuvre. As Catherine Scallen demonstrates in her Rem- sion. It turns out that looking through 17th-century eyes is brandt, reputation and the practice of connoisseurship (2004), the more different from a 20th-century gaze than the mem- most authoritative connoisseurs around 1900 connived at bers of the Rembrandt Research Project and many others each other’s attributions and presented a joint face to the with us suspected. world as the defenders of both their discipline and Rem- As an alternative to the 20th-century stylistic criticism, brandt’s legacy. The result was that Rembrandt’s oeuvre therefore, there is justification for reconstructing Rem- degenerated into an almost indescribable chaos – held brandt’s thinking about the art of painting in a way that together by a concept of genius according to which any- one might compare with a cultural anthropological thing conceivable could be expected from Rembrandt. In research project. In Chapter I, informants from Rem- the end it was one of this group of mutually promoting brandt’s time and from his artistic cultural milieu are authorities, Abraham Bredius, who broke ranks and inaug- interviewed, as it were, to get an overview of the workshop urated a new era of a more critical attitude in Rem- culture of 17th-century Holland. brandt’s reception, increasingly aimed at reducing the size It was the heated discussions within the Rembrandt of what was considered to be Rembrandt’s oeuvre. Research Project concerning one of the paintings which The Rembrandt Research Project stood firmly in this will be treated in the present Volume, the Supper at Emmaus tradition of reduction, a tendency which was enhanced by in Paris (V 14), which eventually led to the re-appraisal of the trauma suffered by the world following the our entire approach to the problems of authenticity and Van Meegeren affair. Moreover, there were forces in play Rembrandt’s oeuvre. As will become evident in this Vol- within the team of the Rembrandt Research Project ume, this re-appraisal is still ongoing. This is by no means which served to lend the influence of what Friedländer a cause for embarrassment, it is rather an intellectual dubbed in his Von Kunst und Kennerschaft the ‘Neinsager’ or feast. nay-sayer an extra weight.3 If one adds to the mix described above the belief in democratic collegiate deci- The essay on methodology sion-making, part of the pervasive ideology of the time, coupled with a strong desire within the group to reach In the Preface of Vol. IV it was announced that Volume V consensus, then one has a good idea of the intellectual cli- would include an essay on methodological aspects of the mate in which the work on Volumes I – III was conduct- work of the Rembrandt Research Project. Since the brief ed. However, it should be stressed that the most important discussion in the Preface of Volume I headed ‘Some factors in the development of a strong ‘reductionist’ ten- Reflections on method’, such reflections have come to dency were the a priori notions assumed by the RRP con- play an increasingly important role in the project – and cerning style, stylistic development and stylistic analysis. with very good reason. Different positions taken with My research on a particular facet of Indian Folk Art respect to method would eventually lead to the review of were crucially important for the change in my personal our entire way of working and the way we presented our thinking on this point. Wölfflin, whose approach was so insights and opinions, as briefly outlined above and more important to the Rembrandt Research Project, was con- exhaustively in the preface to Volume IV. During this vinced that the foundation of art history lay in stylistic period of revision, work began for an essay with the work-

3 Max J. Friedländer, Von Kunst und Kennerschaft. The first German edition was 4 E. van de Wetering, Fighting a Tiger: stability and flexibility in the style of Pabuji published in Zürich in 1939; the edition used here is M.J. Friedländer: On Pars, South Asian Studies 8, 1992, pp. 33-52. art and connoisseurship, transl. T. Borenius, Oxford 1946 (4th ed.), p. 261. xii preface

ing title ‘Reflections on Method II’, for which, as a re - out investigations on the grounds using the method s of the search assistant in 1993-94, the young Emilie Gordenker physical sciences, and on other problems concerning the carried out valuable work researching and correlating the paint layers; while Peter Klein continued his den- literature on the history and cognitive aspects of connois- drochronological analyses of the oak panels used by Rem- seurship. With irregular intervals the essay was further brandt and related painters that had long been so impor- worked on up to 2005 with the intention of including it in tant to the RRP. Jaap van der Veen contributed his the present Volume V. detailed knowledge of the archival material relating to In the event this has not happened, for three reasons. In Rembrandt and his world. 2007 an article appeared in the Burlington Magazine in which Christopher Brown queried the more recent devel- On the title pages of the Volumes I-III the five members opments in the approach of the Rembrandt Research of the team always appeared as authors regardless of how Project with a number of critical remarks.5 This critique much or how little each had contributed. In the Volumes deserved a reply which duly appeared in the Burlington IV and V the present author is given as the main author, Magazine.6 That article incorporated several ideas devel- giving rise to the impression that the Rembrandt Research oped as part of the essay-in-progress. The second reason Project now consisted of only one person. In reality that is was that our treatment of the history of connoisseurship by no means the whole case, as the above paragraph discussed in the essay had in the meantime been super- should make clear, although admittedly in certain respects seded by Anna Tummers’ doctoral dissertation: ‘The finger- the impression is correct. This calls for further explana- print of an : on connoisseurship of seventeenth-century tion, and of a rather personal kind. What was it that Dutch and Flemish paintings: recent debates and seven teenth-century changed with Volume IV? Why have those who con- insights.7 The third reason to suspend – or even abandon – tributed to the writing of Volume V, particularly to the work on ‘Reflections on Method II’ was that digital catalogue texts, not given the status of co-authors rather methods of analyzing images have been developed in the than ‘contributors’? Why were these who contributed recent past, while significant insights in the neurosciences chapters to Volume IV not accorded co-authorial status? now hold out the possibility of understanding some of the One reason is that if contributors were given co-author - cognitive processes involved in connoisseurship; but we ial status, it would imply that they shared authorial simply do not possess the new type of expertise that would responsibility for the contents of the books as a whole, be needed to pursue these possibilites. Moreover, some of rather than their own more specialist contribution. But in our new thinking on methodological questions has already addition, and perhaps more importantly, there is clearly a been presented in the Preface to Volume IV. problem in accounting for both the continuity of the Rembrandt Research Project through the major transition The team and the earlier history of the genesis from the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ team in the early 1990’s, and of Vol. V for the radically different approach taken by the latter. This new approach, and in particular the reattributions to The origin of the present volume has a long history and which it led, were in fact the decision and sole responsibil- many have been involved in it in one way or another. A ity of the present author. He therefore is alone able to great deal of the research had already been carried out by account for the direction taken by the project since the the ‘old team’ during research trips between 1968 and early nineties and for the contents of Volumes IV and V 1975. And from 1989 onward, after the publication of as a whole. It is clear that it would be a misplaced respons- Volume III, Josua Bruyn worked on catalogue entries ibility for those researchers who joined the RRP later, and dealing with the small-scale history pieces painted contributed to Volumes IV and V, to account for an earli- between 1642 and c. ’46. In the 90’s Michiel Franken (for er phase of the project or for the reasons for adopting the a while together with Volker Manuth) had been engaged new thematic approach. Moreover, I was the sole remain- in condensing the relevant RRP logbooks that relate to the ing member who had studied virtually the entire painted paintings dealt with here and in collating and summariz- oeuvre of Rembrandt. ing the existing data – in short producing the basic texts In the light of this prehistory, to which my earlier, not which served as the starting point for many of the entries. entirely happy experiences with ‘connoisseurship by com- He also produced the catalogue entries on the Berlin mittee’ also belong (see the Preface to Volume IV, p. xiii, Susanna (V 1), the Amsterdam Holy Family at night (V 5), the note 20) I considered it better in the context of the second lost Circumcision from the Passion Series for Frederik Hen- phase of the RRP that only one person should assume the drik (V 10) and the Berlin Joseph and Potiphar’s wife (V 22). responsibility of expressing an opinion on the possible Marieke de Winkel did important iconographic and icono- authenticity of a painting, or on doubts over the same. logical research, especially in relation to the Polish Rider (V 20) and the Slaughtered Ox (V 21). Karin Groen carried

5 C. Brown, ‘The Rembrandt Year’, Burl. Mag. 149 (2007), pp. 104-108. 7 A.Tummers; ‘The fingerprint of an Old Master: on connoisseurship of seventeenth- 6 E.v.d.Wetering, ‘Connoisseurship and Rembrandt’s paintings: new century Dutch and Flemish paintings: recent debates and seventeenth-century insights, directions in the Rembrandt Research Project, part II’, Burl. Mag. 150 Ph.D. dissertation, Amsterdam, 2009. For comments on her approach, see (2008), pp. 83-90. p. 319 in this Volume. xiii preface

The future of the RRP and its archives number of individuals who wish to remain anonymous gave generous financial support to the Rembrandt This is the 42nd year of the Rembrandt Research Pro- Research Project at critical junctures when our finances ject’s existence and the task which the RRP originally set threatened to turn dry. itself of ordering and publishing Rembrandt’s painted In the realization of the book as such the essential work oeuvre has still not been completed. The intention was and control of detail with which Lideke Peese Binkhorst that yet another Volume would be devoted to the portraits saw its production through to its final state was - like with and after 1642 and to the landscapes and the all previous Volumes - enormously important. The input large-scale history paintings (mainly paintings with half- and editorial acumen of our translator Murray Pearson, or three-quarter length, life-size figures). Considerable who has been involved in the project since 1996, was also work on these paintings had already been carried out by of great importance. Catalogue entries written before Josua Bruyn and members of the new team – Michiel 1996, the majority in fact, were however translated by Jen- Franken, Marieke de Winkel and Jaap van der Veen. nifer Killian and Katy Kist. Margaret Oomen’s indispen- Whether this will ever happen is for the board of the sible work as assistant and secretary was always of major Foundation Rembrandt Research Project to decide. If importance. Her intense involvement in the project over work on such a volume were to be realized, one assumes many years has been greatly appreciated. When in the last that this would be undertaken from the Netherlands Insti- phase of the book’s production she had to leave the pro- tute for Art History (RKD) in where team ject, her role was miraculously taken over at short notice member Michiel Franken is in charge of the RRP archive by Carin van Nes, to whom we are enormously grateful. which has now been transferred there. We are particularly grateful to Egbert Haverkamp Bege- For the present author, however, as one involved in the mann, who has followed closely the work in progress with RRP from the very first it would be disappointing to end a keen critical eye throughout, and whose always wise the work on the project without being able to round it off comments have played an indispensible role in the evolu- by giving it the shape of a finished assignment. Moreover, tion of the book’s content. Peter Schatborn and Erik Hin- it is at present barely possible for the unititiated to find a terding were most generous in sharing their great knowl- way through the forest of attributions, disattributions, edge concerning Rembrandt’s drawings and etchings with revisions of the same and the more recently newly discov- us. The technical photographer René Gerritsen, whose ered works by Rembrandt etc. that are now distributed expertise was widely employed and greatly appreciated, over the whole Corpus. There is thus a need for a manage- and the restorer Martin Bijl, with his sharply focused able single-volume survey of Rembrandt’s painted oeuvre mind and broad experience, also became closely associat- based on the RRP’s most recent insights, which a book of ed with the production of Volume V. Aryan Hesseling and the Bredius/Gerson type would fulfil. There are in fact Daniëlle Voortman prepared the many digital images for plans to prepare such a book under the responsibility of their function in the book with great love and enthusiasm. the present author. Last of all to become involved was Roel van Straten, who in an extraordinarily concentrated effort compiled the Acknowledgments index and registers of this book. Seeing this work into print required the skills and tech- It will be clear from the above that the task of finding the nology of the Pre Press Media Groep. We are immensely appropriate forms to acknowledge the contribution of grateful for their tolerance over deadlines and for their others to such a long-term production as this volume is generous allocation of time to the project. Special thanks not simple. There are so many different kinds of support are due to Jeanne Hundersmarck for the countless hours and input involved – material, critical, moral and profes- of meticulous labour she has devoted with Lideke Peese sional, all of them essential, that to acknowledge ade- Binkhorst to get the book into its final form. We owe much quately the debt owed to all those concerned is a daunting to our publisher Springer, Nederlof Repro, Grafikon / task. drukkerij Ter Roye and Binderij Callenbach van Wijk.

The work of the project would not have been possible but There are also many individuals who deserve heart-felt for the support of the Netherlands Organisation for the thanks for support and assistance at significant moments, Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO) – or as it is now in particular: Marina Aarts, Mechtild Beckers, Ton de known, the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Beer, Mària van Berge-Gerbaud, Hein van Beuningen, Research (NWO); the University of Amsterdam, and its Hayo de Boer, David Bomford, Bob van den Boogert, Jan- Kunsthistorisch Instituut; the Central Research Laborato- rense Boonstra, Annemarie Bos, Christopher Brown, Lux ry for Objects of Art and Science (now the Netherlands Buurman, Marcus Dekiert, Taco Dibbits, Jan Diepraam, Institute for Cultural Heritage, ICN); the Netherlands Joris Dik, Marieke van den Doel, Leon Dona, Bas Dudok Institute for Art History (RKD); the Rembrandt House van Heel, Frits Duparc, IJsbrand van Dijk, Natasja van Museum; the Rijksmuseum and many other museums all Eck, Margriet van Eikema Hommes, Rudi Ekkart, over the world which own works discussed and/or repro- Charles Erkelens, Sarah Fischer, Sharon Flesher, Richard duced in this Volume. Francisco, JanKarel Gevers, Jeroen Giltay, Emily Gor- We are very grateful to our additional sponsors: SNS denker, Martin Götting, Edward Grasman, Claus Grimm, Reaal, Essilor Benelux, Booz & Company and DSM. A Wim and Ose van de Grind, Frans Grijzenhout, Aernout xiv preface

Hagen, Ed de Heer, Wouter Hugenholtz, Cecile van der feld, Konrad Renger, Gezien van de Riet, Annetje Roor- Harten, IJsbrand Hummelen, Christoph von Imhoff, da-Boersma, Ashok Roy, Martin Royalton-Kisch, Nathan Theo Jansen, Hans and Reinette Jansens van Gellicum- Saban, Alexander Schimmelpenninck, Wim Schot, Daria van Haeften, Ruurd Juist, Jan Kelch, Bram Kempers, Shiskin, van Hillegom, Jan Six, Leonore van René Klomp, Gerbrand Korevaar, Friso Lammerse, Clau- Slooten, Eric Jan Sluijter, Hans Smits, Mieke Smits-Veldt, dia Laurenze, Cynthia van der Leden, Walter Liedtke, Burckhardt and Manuela Söll, Irina Sokolova, Hubert Bernd Lindemann, Rob Lisman, Kristin Lohse Belkin, von Sonnenburg, Gilles and Sytske Stratenus-Dubah, Jan David and Mary Alice Lowenthal, Doron Lurie, Mireille te Strootman, Werner Sumowski, Dorien Tamis, Atty Tor- Marvelde, Peter and Sandra Mensing, Anthonie Meij ers, doir, Christian Tümpel, Jaap van der Veen, Remco Ver - Pieter Meyers, Monique de Meyere, Hotze Mulder, Otto kerk, Martien Versteeg, Piet Visser, Christiaan Vogelaar, Naumann, Petria Nobel, Andrew O’Connor, Antoine Lyckle de Vries, André van de Waal, Jørgen Wadum, Jan Oomen, Henk van Os, Cees Ostendorf, Ab van Overdam, Wassmer, Gregor Weber, Thijs Weststeijn, Jonathan van Nel Oversteegen, Sijbolt Noorda, Ad and Marie-Jeanne de Wetering, Arthur Wheelock, Hermann Wiesler, Melcher Nuyten, Frans Peese Binkhorst, Harm Pinkster, Peter van de Wind, Hendrik Woudt, Manja Zeldenrust, Anthonie de Ploeg, Wim Pijbes, Annet van der Putten, Adrienne Ziemba, and the multitude of other well-disposed and Quarles van Ufford, Paul van der Raad, Katja Reichen- friendly people who have assisted at different times.

Abbreviations of names of persons involved in the research for the catalogue entries

J.B. Josua Bruyn V.M. Volker Manuth P.B. Paul Broekhoff A.Q.v.U. Adrienne Quarles van Ufford M.F. Michiel Franken P.S. Peter Schatborn K.G. Karin Groen P.v.Th. Pieter van Thiel B.H. J.v.d.V. Jaap van der Veen E.H.B. Egbert Haverkamp Begemann M.d.W. Marieke de Winkel S.H.L. Simon H. Levie E.v.d.W.

xv Bibliographical and other abbreviations

Art Bull.–The Art Bulletin, New York 1 (1913) – B. – A. Bartsch, Catalogue raisonné de toutes les estampes qui forment l’oeuvre de Rembrandt et ceux de ses princi- paux imitateurs, Vienna 1797 B. I-XXI – A. Bartsch, Le Peintre-Graveur, vols. I-XXI, Vienna 1803-21 Bauch 1933 – K. Bauch, Die Kunst des jungen Rembrandt, Heidelberg 1933 Bauch 1960 – K. Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit. Studien zur geschichtlichen Bedeutung seines Frühstils, Berlin 1960 Bauch 1966 – K. Bauch, Rembrandt Gemälde, Berlin 1966 Bauch, Eckstein, – J. Bauch, D. Eckstein, M. Meier-Siem, ‘Dating the wood of panels by a dendrochronological Meier-Siem analysis of the tree-rings’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 23 (1972), pp. 485-496 Ben. – O. Benesch, The drawings of Rembrandt. A critical and chronological catalogue, vols. I-VI, London 1954-57; enlarged and edited by E. Benesch, London 1973 Blankert Bol – A. Blankert, Ferdinand Bol (1616-1680), Rembrandt’s pupil, Doornspijk 1982 Br. – A. Bredius, Rembrandt schilderijen, Utrecht 1935 A. Bredius, Rembrandt Gemälde, Vienna 1935 A. Bredius, The paintings of Rembrandt, London 1937 Br.-Gerson – A. Bredius, Rembrandt. The complete edition of the paintings, revised by H. Gerson, London 1969 Burl. Mag. – The Burlington Magazine, London 1 (1903) – Chapman 1990 – H. P. Chapman, Rembrandt’s self-portraits. A study in seventeenth-century identity, New Jersey 1990 Charrington – J. Charrington, A catalogue of the mezzotints after, or said to be after, Rembrandt, Cambridge 1923 Exhib. cat. Art in the – Art in the making. Rembrandt by D. Bomford, Chr. Brown, A. Roy. The National Gallery, London making. Rembrandt, 1988/89 1988/89 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt. – Rembrandt. The master and his workshop, vol. I Paintings by Chr. Brown, J. Kelch, P.J.J. van Thiel. Paintings, 1991/92 Berlin, Amsterdam, London 1991-92 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt. – Rembrandt. The master and his workshop, vol. II Drawings and etchings by H. Bevers, P. Schatborn, Drawings and etchings, B. Welzel. Berlin, Amsterdam, London 1991-92 1991/92 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt/ – Rembrandt/not Rembrandt in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Aspects of connoisseurship: vol. I Paintings: not Rembrandt, problems and issues by H. von Sonnenburg, vol. II Paintings, drawings and prints: art-historical 1995/96 perspectives by W. Liedtke a.o. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York 1995-96 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt. – Rembrandt. A genius and his impact by A. Blankert a.o. Melbourne, Canberra 1997-98 A genius and his impact, 1997/98 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt – Rembrandt by himself by Chr. White and Q. Buvelot. London, The Hague 1999-2000 by himself, 1999/2000 Exhib. cat. The mystery – The mystery of the young Rembrandt by E. van de Wetering, B. Schnackenburg. Kassel, of the young Rembrandt, Amsterdam 2001-02 2001/02 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt- – Rembrandt-Caravaggio by Duncan Bull a.o. Amsterdam 2006 Caravaggio, 2006 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt – Rembrandt – Quest of a genius by E. van de Wetering a.o. Amsterdam Rembrandthuis 2006 Quest of a genius, 2006 (published in Dutch as: Rembrandt – Zoektocht van een genie) Exhib. cat. Rembrandt – Rembrandt - Genie auf der Suche by E. van de Wetering a.o. Berlin Gemäldegalerie Staatliche – Genie auf der Suche, Museen zu Berlin 2006. 2006 Exhib. cat. Uylenburgh – Uylenburgh & zoon. Kunst en commercie van Rembrandt tot De Lairesse 1625-1675 by F. Lammertse & zoon, 2006 and J. van der Veen. Amsterdam Rembrandthuis 2006 Exhib. cat. Rembrandt? – Rembrandt? The master and his workshop by L. Bøgh Rønberg and E.de la Fuente Pedersen a.o. The master and his Copenhagen Statens Museum for Kunst 2006 workshop, 2006 Exhib. cat. – Rembrandts moeder. Mythe en werkelijkheid by C. Vogelaar and G. Korevaar a.o. Leiden Stedelijk moeder, 2006 Museum De Lakenhal 2006 Exhib. cat. Rembrandts – Rembrandts landschappen by C. Vogelaar and G.J.M. Weber a.o. Leiden Stedelijk Museum De landschappen, 2006 Lakenhal/Kassel Staatliche Museen 2006 G.d.B.-A. – Gazette des Beaux-Arts, Paris 1 (1859) – Gerson – H. Gerson, Rembrandt paintings, Amsterdam 1968 Haak 1969 – B. Haak, Rembrandt. Zijn leven, zijn werk, zijn tijd, Amsterdam [1969] HdG – C. Hofstede de Groot, Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten holländischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts, vol. VI, Esslingen a. N.–Paris 1915 xvi bibliographical and other abbreviations

HdG I-X – C. Hofstede de Groot, Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten holländischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts, vols. I-X, Esslingen a. N.–-Paris 1907-1928 HdG Urk – C. Hofstede de Groot, Die Urkunden über Rembrandt, Haag 1906 (Quellenstudien zur holländischen Kunstgeschichte, herausgegeben unter der Leitung von Dr. C. Hofstede de Groot, III) Hind – A.M. Hind, A catalogue of Rembrandt’s etchings, vols. I-II, London 1912 Hoet – G. Hoet, Catalogus of naamlyst van schilderyen, met derzelver pryzen …, vols. I-II, The Hague 1752 Hoet-Terw. – see Terw. Hollst. – F.W.H. Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish etchings, engravings and woodcuts, c. 1450-1700, vols. I – , Amsterdam 1949 – Jb. d. Kunsth. Samml. – Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, Vienna 1 (1883) – Wien Jb. d. Pr. Kunsts. – Jahrbuch der Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, Berlin 1 (1880) – KHI – Kunsthistorisch Instituut, University of Amsterdam Kühn – H. Kühn, ‘Untersuchungen zu den Malgründen Rembrandts’, Jahrbuch der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Württemberg 2 (1965), pp. 189-210 Lugt – F. Lugt, Répertoire des catalogues de ventes, publiques intéressant l’art ou la curiosité …, première période vers 1600-1825, The Hague 1938 Münz – L. Münz, Rembrandt’s etchings, vols. I-II, London 1952 New findings 1987 – P. Klein, D. Eckstein, T. Wazny, J. Bauch, ‘New findings for the dendrochronological dating of panel paintings of the fifteenth to 17th century’, ICOM Committee for Conservation. 8th Triennial Meeting Sydney, Australia. 6-11 September, 1987. Preprints, Los Angeles 1987, pp. 51-54 N.K.J. – Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, The Hague 1 (1947) – O.H. – Oud Holland, Amsterdam 1 (1883) – RKD – Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorische Documentatie (Netherlands Institute for Art History), The Hague Röntgenonderzoek … – M.E. Houtzager, M. Meier-Siem, H. Stark, H.J. de Smedt, Röntgenonderzoek van de oude Utrecht schilderijen in het Centraal Museum te Utrecht, Utrecht 1967 Schneider – H. Schneider, . Sein Leben und seine Werke, Haarlem 1932 Schneider-Ekkart – H. Schneider, with a supplement of R.E.O. Ekkart, Jan Lievens. Sein Leben und seine Werke, Amsterdam 1973 Schwartz 1984 – G. Schwartz, Rembrandt. Zijn leven, zijn schilderijen, Maarssen 1984 Strauss Doc. – W.L. Strauss and M. van der Meulen, with the assistance of S.A.C. Dudok van Heel and P.J.M. de Baar, The Rembrandt Documents, New York 1979 Sumowski 1957/58 – W. Sumowski, ‘Nachträge zum Rembrandtjahr 1956’, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin, Gesellschafts- und sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe 7 (1957/58) nr. 2, pp. 223-247 Sumowski Drawings – W. Sumowski, Drawings of the Rembrandt School 1 – 10, New York 1979 – 1992 Sumowski Gemälde – W. Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler I – VI, Landau/Pfalz 1983 Terw. – P. Terwesten, Catalogus of naamlyst van schilderyen met derzelver pryzen …, vol. III, The Hague 1770 Tümpel 1968 – Chr. Tümpel, ‘Ikonographische Beiträge zu Rembrandt. Zur Deutung und Interpretation seiner Historien’, Jahrbuch der Hamburger Kunstsammlungen 13 (1968), pp. 95-126 Tümpel 1969 – Chr. Tümpel, ‘Studien zur Ikonographie der Historien Rembrandts. Deutung und Interpretation der Bildinhalte’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 20 (1969), pp. 107-198 Tümpel 1971 – Chr. Tümpel, ‘Ikonographische Beiträge zu Rembrandt. Zur Deutung und Interpretation einzelner Werke’, Jahrbuch der Hamburger Kunstsammlungen 16 (1971), pp. 20-38 Tümpel 1986 – Chr. Tümpel (with contributions by A. Tümpel), Rembrandt, Amsterdam –Antwerpen 1986 Van Gelder – J.G. van Gelder, ‘Rembrandts vroegste ontwikkeling’, Mededelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, afd. letterkunde, nieuwe reeks, deel 16, nr. 5 (1953), pp. 273-300 (pp. 1-28) Van de Wetering – E. van de Wetering, Rembrandt. The painter at work, Amsterdam 1997/2009 1997/2009 Von Moltke Flinck – J.W. von Moltke, Govaert Flinck. 1615-1660, Amsterdam 1965 V.S. – C.G. Voorhelm Schneevogt, Catalogue des estampes gravées d’après P.P. Rubens, Haarlem 1873 De Vries, Tóth-Ubbens, – A.B. de Vries, M. Tóth-Ubbens, W. Froentjes, Rembrandt in the . An interdisciplinary Froentjes study, Alphen aan de Rijn 1978 Wallr.-Rich.-Jahrb. – Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch, Köln 1 (1924) – Zeitschr.f.b.K. – Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, Leipzig, Berlin 1 (1866) – Zeitschr.f.Kunstgesch. – Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, Berlin 1 (1932) – xvii