Rembrandt and his Circle: Insights and Discoveries 9789048534524

Citation preview

Rembrandt and his Circle

Amsterdam Studies in the Dutch Golden Age Editorial Board Frans Blom, University of Amsterdam Michiel van Groesen, Leiden University Geert H. Janssen, University of Amsterdam Elmer E.P. Kolfin, University of Amsterdam Nelleke Moser, VU University Amsterdam Henk van Nierop, University of Amsterdam Claartje Rasterhoff, University of Amsterdam Emile Schrijver, University of Amsterdam Thijs Weststeijn, University of Amsterdam Advisory Board H. Perry Chapman, University of Delaware Harold J. Cook, Brown University Benjamin J. Kaplan, University College London Orsolya Réthelyi, Eötvös Loránd University Budapest Claudia Swan, Northwestern University

Rembrandt and his Circle Insights and Discoveries

Stephanie S. Dickey (ed.)

Amsterdam University Press

The publication of this book is made possible by support from Drs Alfred and Isabel Bader and from Queen's University (Kingston, Canada).

Cover illustration: Front: Rembrandt, Self-Portrait with Two Circles, c. 1662-63, oil on canvas, 113 × 94 cm, London, Kenwood House, Inv. No. 57 Back: Rembrandt, The Hundred Guilder Print, c. 1649, etching, drypoint, and engraving, state II/II, 280 × 393 mm, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, H.O. Havemeyer Collection, Bequest of Mrs. H.O. Havemeyer, 1929, inv. 29.107.35 Cover design: Kok Korpershoek, Amsterdam Lay-out: Crius Group, Hulshout Amsterdam University Press English-language titles are distributed in the US and Canada by the University of Chicago Press. isbn 978 94 6298 400 4 e-isbn 978 90 4853 452 4 doi 10.5117/9789462984004 nur 654 © All authors / Amsterdam University Press B.V., Amsterdam 2017 All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copyright owner and the author of the book. Every effort has been made to obtain permission to use all copyrighted illustrations reproduced in this book. Nonetheless, whosoever believes to have rights to this material is advised to contact the publisher.

This book is dedicated with respect, affection, and admiration to Dr. Alfred Bader and Dr. Isabel Bader.

Contents Acknowledgements 9 Introduction 11 Stephanie S. Dickey

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

17

2. Rembrandt and the Germanic Style

44

3. Rembrandt and the Humanist Ideal of the Universal Painter

67

4. Curiosity and Desire: Rembrandt’s Collection as Historiographic Barometer

99

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Thijs Weststeijn

Boudewijn Bakker

H. Perry Chapman

5. Painted Landscapes by Lievens and Rembrandt: The View from Seventeenth-Century Amsterdam Collections

122

6. Jan Lievens in Antwerp: Three Rediscovered Works

151

7. Gerrit Dou as a Pupil of Rembrandt

169

8. A New Painting by Jan van Noordt in Budapest

189

9. Rembrandt’s First Nude?The Recent Analysis of Susanna and the Elders from Rembrandt’s Workshop

197

10. Rembrandt’s Head of Christ: Some Technical Observations concerning Matters of Style

216

11. A Rediscovered Head of John the Baptist on a Platter from Rembrandt’s Studio

223

Jacquelyn N. Coutré

Stephanie S. Dickey

Martin Bijl

Ildikó Ember

Katja Kleinert and Claudia Laurenze-Landsberg

Arie Wallert and Michel van der Laar

Lloyd DeWitt

12. Rembrandt’s One Guilder Print: Value and Invention in ‘the most beautiful [print] that ever came from the burin of this Master’ Amy Golahny

230

13. Rembrandt, Ferdinand Bol, and Tobit: The Emergence of a Pathosträger 252 Jan L. Leja

14. Biblical Iconography in the Graphic Work of Rembrandt’s Circle

268

15. Jan van Vliet and Rembrandt van Rijn: Their Collaboration Reassessed

285

16. Printmaking among Artists of the Rembrandt School

305

17. Chain Line Pattern Matching and Rembrandt’s Prints

319

List of Illustrations

335

Peter van der Coelen

Jaco Rutgers

Nadine M. Orenstein

C. Richard Johnson, Jr., William A. Sethares, Margaret Holben Ellis, Saira Haqqi, Reba Snyder, Erik Hinterding, Idelette van Leeuwen, Arie Wallert, Dionysia Christoforou, Jan van der Lubbe, Nadine M. Orenstein, Angela Campbell, and George Dietz

Bibliography 347 Index Nominum

375

Acknowledgements This book owes its genesis to a series of conferences held in 2009, 2011, and 2013 at Queen’s University’s Bader International Study Centre at Herstmonceux Castle in East Sussex, UK. These meetings brought together distinguished art historians, museum curators, conservators, and conservation scientists concerned with the study of Rembrandt and artists in his circle. The Castle was a gift to Queen’s University by alumnus Dr. Alfred Bader and his wife, Dr. Isabel Bader. In addition to being an internationally renowned chemist, entrepreneur, and philanthropist, Alfred Bader is a connoisseur whose passion for collecting and studying Dutch art has endured for more than fifty years. Tangible proof of this passion is The Bader Collection at the Agnes Etherington Art Centre on Queen’s University’s home campus in Kingston, Ontario. It was Alfred’s vision that brought our conference series into being, and his generous support that has made the conferences, and this book, a reality. In planning and organizing the Herstmonceux conferences, and in compiling and editing this volume, it has been a pleasure to collaborate with Queen’s colleagues including Jacquelyn Coutré, David de Witt, Franziska Gottwald, and Ron Spronk. David and Franziska’s move to Amsterdam, where David is now senior curator at Museum Het Rembrandthuis, has only strengthened their commitment to the cause. At each conference, efficient Castle staff and a terrific team of student volunteers helped the proceedings to run smoothly. We are honoured to thank the Samuel H. Kress Foundation for supporting conference participants’ travel from North America. And most of all, we are grateful to Alfred and Isabel Bader. We acknowledge their generosity, and, equally important, their enduring commitment to fostering scholarly exchange and especially the study of

Rembrandt and the many talented artists who surrounded him in Leiden and Amsterdam. The business of illustrating an art historical text is fraught with complications for authors who must grapple with diverse policies and costs for reproduction of works of art. This book, and the scholarly community as a whole, owe a tremendous debt to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, the National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC, and the J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, for pioneering open access to high quality images of objects in their care. Other institutions that kindly cooperated in the illustration of this book are acknowledged in the pages that follow. In preparing the text, Elmer Kolfin and Eddy Schavemaker offered useful editorial advice. Matthew Hayes, Jennifer Kilian and Katy Kist produced elegant translations. At Amsterdam University Press, Inge van der Bijl and her colleagues guided the publication process with kindness and patience. Sincere thanks must be offered to the authors represented here, and to all our other conference participants who contributed to our stimulating discussions and have shared their results in other forms. Their names are listed in the captions of the group photographs that accompany the Introduction. Lastly, I am grateful to Boudewijn Bakker, Christopher Brown, Marten Jan Bok, H. Perry Chapman, S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, the late Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, and Eric Jan Sluijter for wise counsel along the way. Stephanie S. Dickey Bader Chair in Northern Baroque Art Queen’s University Kingston, Canada September 1, 2017

Introduction Stephanie S. Dickey

Stephanie S. Dickey (ed.), Rembrandt and his Circle. Insights and Discoveries. Amsterdam University Press, 2017 doi: 10.5117/9789462984004/intro

Rembrandt van Rijn is an artist whose paintings, prints, and drawings have continued to move, perplex, and surprise viewers for nearly four hundred years. Despite the wealth of publications that have been devoted to Rembrandt’s art, there is always something to discover.1 Since 2009, Queen’s University’s Bader International Study Centre at Herstmonceux Castle, East Sussex, UK, has become the venue for an ongoing series of international colloquia on Rembrandt and his circle.2 These meetings have brought together a distinguished roster of academic art historians, museum professionals, conservators, and conservation scientists (figs. I.1, I.2, I.3) to share ideas about current and future directions in the study of Rembrandt, and to learn more about the talented artists who worked with him in Leiden and Amsterdam over the course of his long and influential career. In the f irst conference at Herstmonceux, ‘Expanding the Field of Rembrandt Studies’, held in June 2009, our mandate was to take a fresh look at the scholarship around Rembrandt using every current means, from iconographic, contextual and archival study to technical examination and scientific analysis. By bringing together art historians and scientists whose research examines Rembrandt and his circle from different points of view, we were able to pose new questions, stimulate new projects, and spark new conversations. The lively discussions

that continued in the conferences that followed (‘Rembrandt and his Circle: International Colloquium’, July 2011, and ‘New Directions in the Study of Rembrandt and his Circle’, July 2013) have contributed to a variety of initiatives and projects: publications, museum exhibitions, technical investigations, and online research tools that are shaping the field of Rembrandt studies.3 This book presents a selected group of independent insights and discoveries first discussed at Herstmonceux. Each of the seventeen chapters examines a particular work of art or issue related to Rembrandt or an artist associated with him. Each essay stands on its own, and together they reflect the many ways in which current scholarship continues to open new perspectives and raise new questions about Rembrandt and his impact. A key goal of our colloquia has been to explore the implications of Rembrandt’s activities not only as a practicing artist, but as a colleague, teacher and mentor. Far from being the isolated genius imagined by nineteenth-century Romantics, Rembrandt was surrounded by friends and acolytes throughout his career; at least forty documented pupils are known. 4 Related artists considered in this volume include his Leiden colleagues Jan van Vliet, Jan Lievens, and Gerrit Dou and his Amsterdam associates Ferdinand Bol, Gerbrand van den Eeckhout, and Samuel van Hoogstraten, as well

12 

as artists such as Salomon Koninck and Jan van Noordt, whose work reflects the broader reach of Rembrandt’s competitive presence in Amsterdam. Perhaps the most surprising connection traced here is with an artist who was already an established master when Rembrandt arrived in Amsterdam. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel presents compelling evidence that the renowned Haarlem portraitist Frans Hals rubbed elbows with Rembrandt when he came to Amsterdam to paint the group portrait now known as The Meagre Company. Hals returned to Haarlem, leaving the monumental canvas to be completed by Pieter Codde, but also leaving his mark on portraiture in Amsterdam. From the first, our gatherings were designed to promote the exchange of ideas across disciplines. Thus, the contributions in this book have been shaped by diverse methodologies. Several authors consider contextual factors and literary evidence to explore what it meant for Rembrandt to establish himself as an artist of international stature in the thriving city of Amsterdam: how he positioned himself as artist and art collector. Thijs Weststeijn shows that Rembrandt and his contemporaries took a deep and even archaeological interest in their Teutonic past, thus shedding new light on the commission of the Batavian cycle for the Amsterdam Town Hall, including Rembrandt’s Conspiracy of the Batavians under Claudius Civilis (1661–1661, Stockholm, Nationalmuseum). Boudewijn Bakker considers Rembrandt’s engagement with the ideal of the ‘universal painter’, well-versed in all aspects of his art. This was an aim and an accomplishment that set Rembrandt apart in an era when artistic specialization was becoming the norm. Bakker traces the theoretical tradition that must have inspired Rembrandt’s lofty ambition and discerns how this ideal may have shaped the magisterial Self-Portrait in Kenwood House. Perry Chapman traces the history of critical

Stephanie S. Dickey

responses to Rembrandt’s activity as a collector of art and curiosities and considers what this activity meant for the artist himself. Jacquelyn Coutré examines the taste for landscape paintings by Rembrandt and Jan Lievens on the Amsterdam art market of their time. Essays by Stephanie Dickey, Ildikó Ember, Lloyd DeWitt, and Martin Bijl present recently rediscovered paintings that can be attributed to artists in Rembrandt’s circle. Their arguments depend on evidence ranging from contemporaneous visual and print sources to connoisseurship and scientific analysis. Technical methods of examination and treatment play an increasingly important role in current approaches to the understanding of Rembrandt’s working methods and their adaptation by his associates. In this volume, Arie Wallert and Michel van der Laar show how technical examination can shed light on a thorny question of attribution; their precise observations provide fresh insights into Rembrandt’s complex painterly technique and conf irm an attribution to the master himself. Katja Kleinert and Claudia LaurenzeLandsberg present technical analysis of a small and perplexing painting in Berlin that may well have begun as Rembrandt’s f irst foray into painting the female nude. Moving beyond the technical study of paintings, materials scientist C. Richard Johnson and an interdisciplinary team of researchers demonstrate an innovative new method for identifying papers used in the printing of Rembrandt’s etchings. In studies of Rembrandt and the graphic arts, drawings and their uses in the artist’s workshop have become a topic of great interest.5 Here, Jan Leja shows how drawings played a crucial role in Ferdinand Bol’s production as a student of Rembrandt and later as a mature master and teacher himself. Rembrandt’s brilliant approach to printmaking never ceases to

Introduc TION INTRODUC tion

be admired, but relatively little attention has been given to how his innovative process might have been absorbed by his followers. This book presents three essays, by Jaco Rutgers, Peter van der Coelen, and Nadine Orenstein, that explore Rembrandt’s impact as a printmaker and the network of artists who followed his example in etching. While Rutgers and Van der Coelen offer different perspectives on Rembrandt’s collaboration with Jan van Vliet in Leiden, Orenstein demonstrates that the culture of printmaking around Rembrandt in Amsterdam was surprisingly extensive and deserves further inquiry. Circling back to the master himself, Amy Golahny examines The Hundred Guilder Print as a ref lection of Rembrandt’s competitive engagement with Italian Renaissance antecedents such as Marcantonio Raimondi’s mysterious Il Morbetto, engraved after a design by Raphael, for which Rembrandt exchanged an impression of his own masterpiece. Golahny’s study adds weight to Perry Chapman’s assertion that Rembrandt’s creative activities and his collecting of art were closely linked – just one of many productive connections that can be traced among the essays collected here.

Notes 1.

For a recent review of the field, see ­Stephanie S. Dickey, ‘Rembrandt and his Circle’, in: Wayne Franits (ed.), Ashgate Research Companion to Dutch Art (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2016), pp. 169–201. 2. Three conferences on Rembrandt and his circle took place at Herstmonceux on 27–29 June 2009, 21–24 July 2011, and 18–21 July 2013. Results of a fourth conference on 16–19 July 2015, focused on the work of Govert Flinck and Ferdinand Bol, will be published separately as Stephanie S. Dickey (ed.), Ferdinand Bol and Govert Flinck: New Research (Zwolle: W Books, 2017). A fifth meeting is in the works. These

13

conferences have been made possible by generous support from Drs Alfred and Isabel Bader, the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, and Queen’s University (Kingston, Canada). 3. Among publications discussed at Herst­ monceux in formative stages are Erik Hinterding and Jaco Rutgers, Rembrandt van Rijn, New Hollstein Dutch and Flemish Etchings, Engravings, and Woocuts 1450–1700 (Oudekerek aan den Ijssel: Sound & Vision, 2013); Eric Jan Sluijter, Rembrandt’s Rivals: History Painting in Amsterdam 1630–1650 (Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2015); Thijs Weststeijn, Art and Antiquity in the Netherlands and Britain: The Vernacular Arcadia of Franciscus Junius (1591–1677) (Leiden: Brill, 2015), and numerous journal articles and technical reports. The conferences also fostered collegial exchange in advance of exhibitions such as Rembrandt and the Face of Jesus (Philadelphia Museum of Art, Milwaukee Art Museum, and Musée du Louvre, Paris, 2011–2012); Rembrandt in America (Raleigh, North Carolina Museum of Art, Cleveland, Art Institute, and Minneapolis, Institute of Arts, 2011–2012); Rembrandt and the Dutch Golden Age (Szépművészeti Múzeum, Budapest, 2014); and Rembrandt. The Late Works (National Gallery, London, and Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, 2014–2015), and contributed to the development of two open access digital research archives, www.remdoc. org, hosted by Radboud University, Nijmegen, and www.rembrandtdatabase.org, hosted by the Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorische Documentatie, The Hague. 4. For a recent overview, see David de Witt et al., Rembrandt’s Late Pupils. Studying under a Genius, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam, 2015. 5. For recent studies of drawing in Rembrandt’s circle see, e.g., Holm Bevers et al., Drawings by Rembrandt and His Pupils. Telling the Difference, J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 2009; Judith Noorman and David de Witt (eds), Rembrandt’s Naked Truth. Drawing Nude Models in the Golden Age, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam, 2016, with further references.

I-1. Expanding the Field of Rembrandt Studies, Queen’s University Bader International Study Centre, Herstmonceux Castle, UK, 26 June 2009. Front Row (L-R): Ron Spronk, Eric Jan Sluijter, S.A.C. Dudok van Heel. Second Row: Isabel Bader, Alfred Bader, Stephanie Dickey, Ronni Baer, Taco Dibbits, Emilie Gordenker, Peter Schatborn, Christopher Brown, Shelley Perlove, H. Perry Chapman, Albert Blankert, Astrid Tumpel. Third Row: Ernst van de Wetering, Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, Volker Manuth, David Bomford, Amy Golahny, Michael Zell, Betsy Wieseman, William Robinson, Claudia Laurenze-Landsberg, Paul Crenshaw, Melanie Gifford, Ashok Roy, Margriet van Eikema-Hommes, Petria Noble, Erma Hermens, Karin Groen, Thijs Weststeijn, Erik Hinterding. Back Row: David de Witt, Michiel Roscam Abbing, Pieter Roelofs, Friso Lammertse, Gregor Weber, Edwin Buijsen, Michiel Franken, Marten Jan Bok, Walter Liedtke, Jaco Rutgers, Gary Schwartz, Arie Wallert, Lloyd DeWitt, Christian Tumpel, Jeroen Giltaij, Martin Bijl, Janrense Boonstra, Jonathan Bikker, Doron Lurie, Holm Bevers. Not pictured: Boudewijn Bakker

I-2. Rembrandt and his Circle: International Colloquium, Queen’s University Bader International Study Centre Herstmonceux Castle, 22 July 2011. Front Row (L-R): Stephanie Dickey, David de Witt, Marten Jan Bok, S.A.C. Dudok van Heel. Second Row: Ron Spronk, Erna Kok, Margriet van Eikema-Hommes, Jeroen Giltaij, Ernst van de Wetering, Alfred Bader, Isabel Bader, Ben Broos, Christopher Brown, Marieke de Winkel. Third Row: Claudia Laurenze-Landsberg, Amy Golahny, Petria Noble, Catherine Scallen, Michael Zell, Ann Adams, H. Perry Chapman, Nadine Orenstein, Ronni Baer, Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann, Ildikó Ember, Thijs Weststeijn, Jaco Rutgers, Loekie Schwartz, Peter van der Coelen, Ann Woollett, Lee Hendrix, Jan Leja. Fourth Row: Albert Blankert, Arie Wallert, Boudewijn Bakker, Volker Manuth, Paul Crenshaw, Dennis Weller, Melanie Gifford, Bob van den Boogert, Karin Groen, Janrense Boonstra, Erik Hinterding, Eric Jan Sluijter, Jacquelyn Coutré, Shelley Perlove, Gary Schwartz, Gregor Weber, Michiel Franken, David Bomford. Back Row: Betsy Wieseman, William Robinson, George Keyes, Tom Rassieur, Peter Schatborn, Christian Tico Seifert, Tom van der Molen, Jonathan Bikker, Ige Verslype

I-3. New Directions in the Study of Rembrandt and his Circle, Queen’s University Bader International Study Centre, Herstmonceux Castle, 20 July 2013. Front Row (L-R): Jacquelyn Coutré, Erik Hinterding, Arie Wallert, Jaco Rutgers, Ben Broos, Amy Golahny, Michael Zell, David de Witt, Second Row: Hannah Woodward, Christopher White, Christopher Brown, Egbert HaverkampBegemann, Paul Crenshaw, Petria Noble, Volker Manuth, Melanie Gifford, Loekie Schwartz, Erma Hermens, Perry Chapman, Nadine Orenstein, Peter van der Coelen, Anne Woollett, Erna Kok, Ildikó Ember, Jeroen Giltaij, Dominique Surh, Robert Erdmann, Arthur Wheelock, Peter Schatborn. Third Row: Stephanie Dickey, Boudewijn Bakker, Robert Fucci, Marieke De Winkel, Gregor Weber, S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, Paul Crenshaw, David Bomford, C. Richard Johnson, Gary Schwartz, Jan Leja, Tom Rassieur, Eric Jan Sluijter, Ronni Baer, Friso Lammertse, Ron Spronk, Michiel Franken, Annelies van Loon, Martin Bijl, Pieter Roelofs, Rudie van Leeuwen, Betsy Wieseman, Marten Jan Bok, Lloyd DeWitt, Ilona van Tuinen, Thijs Weststeijn, Annelies van Loon, Ad Stijnman. Not pictured: Joris Dik, Anna Krekeler

1.

Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Stephanie S. Dickey (ed.), Rembrandt and his Circle. Insights and Discoveries. Amsterdam University Press, 2017 doi: 10.5117/9789462984004/ch1 Abstract This study combines a compelling array of circumstantial evidence with a fresh look at existing documents to demonstrate that Rembrandt and Frans Hals must have encountered each other in Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Amsterdam workshop in 1633. The author identifies a number of portraits painted by Hals in Amsterdam and considers Hals’s impact on several of Rembrandt’s portraits of the early 1630s, including the magnificent Marten Soolmans and Oopjen Coppit, recently acquired by the Rijksmuseum in partnership with the Musée du Louvre. Keywords: Rembrandt van Rijn, Frans Hals, Hendrick Uylenburgh, Pieter Codde, Cornelis van der Voort, portraiture, Amsterdam, Haarlem

Buried in a note of my dissertation lies an explosive art historical encounter. The following can be read in the description of The Meagre Company by Frans Hals and Pieter Codde: The civic guard painting may have been commissioned in 1633 from Hendrik Uylenburgh, who subsequently engaged Frans Hals, just as in 1632 he had approached Rembrandt to execute the Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Tulp. […] Frans Hals stopped coming to Amsterdam after only a few sessions, and following the discontinuation of Uylenburgh’s workshop near the lock due to Rembrandt’s departure and Uylenburgh’s move to a new location, the unfinished militia piece remained behind […]. Pieter Codde, who lived in the neighbourhood, was then charged with finishing the painting.

This observation of the two great masters working in the same workshop can now be elaborated upon in greater detail.1

Hendrick Uylenburgh in Cornelis van der Voort’s Portrait Workshop Hendrick Uylenburgh established himself in the Sint Anthonisbreestraat (at the corner of the lock, or 2 Jodenbreestraat) in the former workshop of the portraitist Cornelis van der Voort around 1625. The property at the corner of the lock and the ‘Rembrandt House’ next door on the main street (Breestraat, or Broad Street), built during the first modern Amsterdam city expansion, were precursors of the later merchant houses along the prestigious Herengracht

18 

and Keizersgracht in the canal district. Their appeal lay in the luxurious layout with high ceilings and large windows, which allowed for more light and space than was found in the mediaeval houses of the ancient city centre. This made it possible to set up a workshop in line with the Antwerp model, employing several specialized assistants at the same time. Uylenburgh was a merchant and an art dealer, and had also trained as an artist in Poland, although not a single painting, drawing, or print by him is extant, that is to say, none that have been discovered or identified. At the end of the Twelve Years’ Truce, in 1620-1621, he purchased a substantial amount of art in the northern and southern Netherlands at the behest of the King of Poland. At the time, art was widely bought in the bustling metropolis of Antwerp, where this kind of international dealing had long been conducted in and around the Beurs (Bourse). 2 Uylenburgh was more interested in buying and selling than actually making art. At least, this is suggested by most of the archival documents relating to him up to 1630, in which he is invariably called a merchant.3 Why, therefore, did he not set up shop in the neighbourhood of the Amsterdam Beurs (Bourse), or on the Dam, or at the head of the Kalverstraat, which was already home to various art dealers? He would only relocate his art business to the Dam in the 1640s. 4 The renting of the well-patronized former workshop of the portrait painter Cornelis van der Voort can hardly have been a coincidence,5 but rather must have been a well-considered move on Uylenburgh’s part. By that time the Sint Anthonisbreestraat had become the epicentre of the activities of the Guild of Saint Luke, whose guildhall had been located in the nearby Waag (Weigh House) at the beginning of the street since 1619.6 While we know of many artists who also dealt in art, they nevertheless derived their chief source of income from

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

painting. Among them was the Dutch-Danish painter Pieter Isaacxzn, who around 1602 had already relocated his workshop, called Cronenburgh, to the new artists’ quarter (53 Sint Anthonisbreestraat), the address from which Hendrick Uylenburgh would continue his business after 1638.7 Pieter Isaacxzn came to the Republic as the agent of the King of Denmark in 1618 to place orders with a number of artists in Amsterdam and The Hague.8 His involvement in procuring art for the kings of Poland and Denmark came to a halt with the onset of the Thirty Years’ War, when the King of Denmark joined the fray in 1625 and trade with the Baltic region stagnated. The wartime circumstances must have spurred Hendrick Uylenburgh to reorient himself. He returned to the Netherlands and established himself in Amsterdam, where his wife had numerous contacts and relatives in the Mennonite community. He opened his account with the Amsterdam Wisselbank (Exchange Bank) in 1625. On 13 May 1625 the pictures owned by Cornelis van der Voort went under the hammer, and they were followed on 30 August by the workshop inventory because the artist’s widow and her family were moving to Leiden. It has been pointed out that Hendrick Uylenburgh was not among the buyers at these auctions. He would only rent the property at the lock gates as of 1 May 1626.9 However, it is improbable that the house remained empty for eight months from 1 September 1625 to 1 May 1626. More likely, the widow left after transferring tenancy to Uylenburgh, at the latest per 1 November – traditionally one of the expiry dates of rental contracts – yet 1 September is more plausible given the estate sale held on 30  August. It would appear that the majority of the workshop inventory was auctioned off; whether this was all of it is not known. Uylenburgh’s absence at the sale is perhaps explained by the fact that, in assuming the rent,

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

he also took over effects from the estate and the workshop. He may have initially continued the atelier on the same footing. When he bought three butter dishes for his household at an auction on 16 October 1626 and did not pay cash, the following was inscribed in the sales record: Hendrick van Ulenburch, schilder bij St. Theunissluis (Hendrick Uylenburgh, painter at the St. Theunissluis [Sint Anthonisbreestraat, near the lock gates]).10 In this document he is not mentioned as a merchant, but as a painter, which in connection with the address is very significant. From that moment it can be said with certainty that Hendrick Uylenburgh lived and worked as a painter in what had once been Van der Voort’s shop. Uylenburgh is known to have attracted artists to his premises to work on projects as of 1631. This is not based on preserved employment contracts, but on a single chance document and an analysis of the portraits produced in his shop.11 Ernst van de Wetering already noted in 1986: ‘one interesting aspect which is not mentioned by Baldinucci is that the production of portraits must have been an integral part of the Uylenburgh business from the very beginning.’12 It seems safe to assume that, from 1625, the activities of Van de Voort’s portrait shop – specialized in life-size portraits, regent groups and civic guards – were continued under Uylenburgh’s direction for the same clientele, as the production after 1631 did not simply materialize out of thin air. Uylenburgh brokered the commissions. Precedents for this practice can be found earlier in Amsterdam,13 but his model will have been the advanced division of labor common in Antwerp workshops. The consequence of this method was that truly autograph paintings became rarer while workshop products proliferated. Illustrative in this respect is Uylenburgh’s purchase in 1620 of a series of twelve paintings of Christian apostles from the workshop of Anthony van

19

Dyck in Antwerp, various copies of which were produced. The remains of three such series from Van Dyck’s workshop are known. Not one of them can be distinguished as the original autograph series by Van Dyck, and all three consist of works by the master and assistants, or workshop copies corrected by the master.14 Uylenburgh also knew of Rubens’s workshop, about which in 1621 a visitor wrote: ‘Daar waren veel jonge schilders bijeen, die elk bezig waren met een ander werk dat Rubens hun met krijt had voorgetekend en dat hier en daar met kleuren verlevendigd was’ (Many young painters were there together, each one busy with a different work that Rubens had drawn with chalk, enlivened here and there with colours).15 Similar methods can be discerned in Uylenburgh’s workshop after 1631, with Rembrandt there as the supervisor. We may infer that this practice had not been different between 1625 and 1631.

Rembrandt’s Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp (fig. 1.1)16 The activities in Hendrick Uylenburgh’s workshop following the Antwerp model became evident in the fall of 1631. After their election in September 1631, the wardens of the Surgeons’ Guild must have decided to have themselves immortalized together with Dr. Nicolaes Tulp (1593–1674), 17 their new praelector, for their guildhall in the Waag (where the painters had their own hall as well). The surgeons’ previous portrait commission had been extended by the then newly elected wardens and Tulp’s predecessor, Dr. Johan Fonteijn, on 6 September 1625 to Nicolaes Eliaszn Pickenoy, who was known to be a slow worker. He delivered the painting to the guildhall more than a year later, on 15 October 1626.18 In 1630 Pickenoy was working on a large civic guard portrait for the

20 

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

1.1. Rembrandt, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, 1632, oil on canvas, 169.5 × 216.5 cm, The Hague, Mauritshuis, inv. 146

Voetboogdoelen (Crossbowmen’s Hall) and in 1632 on a similar piece for the Handboogdoelen (Archers’ Hall).19 His colleague Thomas de Keyser completed a painting for the Kloveniersdoelen (Calivermen’s Hall) in 163220 and one for the Voetboogdoelen in 1633.21 Jan Tengnagel, who had executed two militia pictures in his workshop also situated at the corner of the lock gates (1 Jodenbreestraat) in 1613 and 1621, had in the meantime become a deputy sheriff and was no longer painting.22 Hence, in 1631 none of the artists best suited to the task were available to paint an anatomy lesson.

The wardens of the guild must have then found their way to the former workshop of Cornelis van der Voort and asked Hendrick Uylenburgh to engage a painter for the winter season of 1631–1632 and arrange the painting of an anatomy lesson with Dr. Nicolaes Tulp. In addition, the wardens had to negotiate with the judicial authorities about dissecting a subjectum anatomicum, the disposal date of which was still entirely unknown. Preparations for the painting had to be complete the moment a body was available. The anatomy lessons preferably took place during the cold days of the winter in

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

the Theatrum Anatomicum of the Waag. With this in mind, Hendrick Uylenburgh recruited Rembrandt from Leiden in the fall of 1631. 23 It is known that Uylenburgh had contacts in Leiden.24 Rembrandt had already become acquainted with a modern workshop in 1625 during his apprenticeship with Pieter Lastman on the other side of the Sint Anthonisbreestraat (no. 59),25 but he had a fairly limited workspace at his parents’ house in Leiden. The family home in the Weddesteeg, on the outskirts of the city in the Pelikaanshoek neighbourhood, was a modest dwelling with low ceilings and small windows.26 Hence, there was insufficient space and light to accommodate a capacious working environment. The majority of his early works were diminutive, with a core of prints and small paintings. Uylenburgh’s workshop would offer him opportunities to develop and to work on a larger scale.27 While waiting for the start of this important commission, Rembrandt painted a number of portraits – a genre he had not previously chanced: he portrayed Nicolaes Ruts,28 an unknown elderly man – a notary in old-fashioned garb – at his desk,29 and Marten Looten.30 By this time the set-up of the Anatomy Lesson must have been ready, perhaps with f igures blocked in. On 28 January 1632 a criminal was sentenced to death and his body awarded to the Surgeons’ Guild for dissection. The sentence was carried out on 31 January, after which the public lessons in the Waag could begin and Rembrandt could finally begin laying in the shaven dead body, without the right hand and left lower arm, which were prepared at a later stage.31 He had already finished The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp by April 1632, for the artist was working in that month on a portrait of the stadtholder’s wife, Amalia von Solms, in The Hague.32 Thus, Rembrandt seems to have completed the group portrait assignment in just

21

a short time. The idea that Dr. Tulp personally approached Rembrandt to paint his anatomy lesson simply does not hold water, because at the time a suitable candidate was being sought for this commission, the artist did not yet have a single portrait to his name. Outside of Leiden he was known only to his confrères – including Uylenburgh – and a few connoisseurs.

Frans Hals and the Civic Guard Painting of Precinct XI Through the enormous wave of immigration from the Southern Netherlands and the development of new districts, the number of Amsterdam civic guard companies multiplied to twenty by 1620. As a result the three Doelens became too small to accommodate all the civic guards and were therefore enlarged and expanded. This generated new demand for paintings of civic guard pieces for the still-bare walls of the new halls added to the existing buildings. In 1632 it was time for the Nieuwe Zaal (New Hall) at the Voetboogdoelen on the Singel to be decorated. For the long back wall measuring six meters, across from the windows, Thomas de Keyser would portray the militiamen of Precinct XVIII, and more than four meters of wall space facing the mantelpiece was reserved33 for the militiamen of Precinct XI.34 A younger generation of artists specializing in group portraiture had yet to emerge. Like the Surgeons’ Guild, the Burgerwees­ huis (Orphanage) ran into the same problem of not having a suitable painter when its governors wanted to have group portraits painted for their renovated rooms. For the portrait of the regents (f ig. 1.2), Abraham de Vries was beckoned to Amsterdam from Antwerp in 1632, and for that of the regentesses, the services of Jacob Backer from Friesland were enlisted in 1633.35 As the regent Nicolaes Hasselaer

22 

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

1.2. Abraham de Vries, Regents of the Burgerweeshuis, 1633, oil on canvas, 257 × 401 cm, Amsterdam, Amsterdam Museum, inv. SB 4846

(far right in f ig. 1.2) is not depicted wearing black civilian clothing, but is represented as major-commander of the city in military dress, this regent group portrait looks more like a civic guard piece. Perhaps this had to do with the recent political diff iculties between the Calvinists and the Remonstrants (see below). Because of this it occupies a unique place among regent portraits. The Sint Anthonisbreestraat between the lock and the gate (Jodenbreestraat) was the main street of Precinct XI,36 and it therefore stands to reason that the guardsmen would have turned to their neighbor Hendrick Uylenburgh (2 Jodenbreestraat) for help in finding a portraitist. In joint consultation, Uylenburgh must have advanced the idea of commissioning Frans Hals – with his stellar reputation in this genre – to come to Amsterdam. In

1633 Hals began work on the painting, now familiarly known as The Meagre Company (fig. 1.3 and pl. 1.3),37 but before he could finish it he had to return to Haarlem to take on the next Haarlem militia piece.38 In that year, Rembrandt had executed many portrait commissions in Uylenburgh’s workshop, including a double portrait for the master shipbuilder Jan Rijcksen and his wife Griet Jans,39 and the portrait of the Remonstrant preacher Johannes Wtenbogaert, for which the sitter posed on 13 April 1633, 40 but he did not yet have a single civic guard painting to his name. Perhaps the head of the workshop, Uylenburgh, preferred that Rembrandt concentrate on individual portraits, such as the full-length marriage portraits of Marten Soolmans and Oopjen Coppit, who were wed in June 1633, 41 and therefore did not put him to work on the civic guard

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

23

1.3. Frans Hals and Pieter Codde, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Militia Company of District XI under the Command of Captain Reijnier Reael (1588-1648) and Lieutenant Cornelis Michielszn Blaeuw (1591-1638), known as The Meagre Company, 1637, oil on canvas, 209 × 429 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, on loan from the City of Amsterdam, inv. SK-C-374

painting. Bringing Frans Hals to Amsterdam allowed Uylenburgh to accept the commission for the civic guard painting without crimping the output of his f lourishing workshop for portraits. Later in 1636 Frans Hals bemoaned the fact that during his activities he ‘tot Amsterdam in de herberge veel verteert heeft in plaetse dat geseyt was dat men hem soude defroyeren’ (had incurred great costs lodging at the inn in Amsterdam, for which it had been agreed that the costs would be defrayed). 42 There is no mention of expenses for renting a workshop. Does this mean that Hals was accommodated at an inn during the whole time he worked in Amsterdam? This would be odd, for on 26 July 1632 Rembrandt was in fact lodging with Uylenburgh: staying ‘ten huijse aldaer’ (at his house there).43 Why not Hals, too? Is it not more likely that Hals only moved to the inn after some conflict had occurred? We would dearly like to know what address Frans Hals gave in August 1634, when

he bought a painting by Hendrick Goltzius for eighty-nine guilders at an auction on the Dam in Amsterdam. As he did not have cash with him, his name and address ought to have been entered after the entry of painting in the auction report, just as had been the case with Uyenburgh’s purchase of the butter dishes in 1626. Unfortunately, the register of 1630–1635, kept by the auctioneer Daniel Janszn van Beuningen, has not been preserved. 44 Thus, we do not know Hals’s Amsterdam address. This sale is only known because of a notarial document regarding a disagreement with Van Beuningen. 45 My reading of the 1636 document concerning the inn leads me to conclude that Frans Hals, like Rembrandt, initially lodged with Uylenburgh and worked on his civic guard portrait in the Uylenburgh studio. The local guardsmen could easily come and pose for him there. And is it not likely that when Rembrandt brought his new wife to Amsterdam in the summer of 1634,46 and the couple lodged with Uylenburgh,

24 

that this was the appropriate moment for Frans Hals to find accommodation at an inn? This could explain why this was not provided for in the original contract. In any case, it would appear that Frans Hals worked on the civic guard painting for the last time in the summer of 1634. Rembrandt moved to his own quarters in the Nieuwe Doelenstraat in May 1635, but Hals did not return to Amsterdam in the summer of that year to complete the painting. Negotiations with Hals in 1635 on Saint John the Baptist’s Day ­– 24 June – amounted to nothing, nor again in 1636, primarily because the guardsmen refused to travel to Haarlem to sit for their portrait. Consequently, the painting remained unf inished in the workshop for two years. 47 This civic guard painting measured 209 × 429 cm. Its original stretcher remained intact and was only replaced during a restoration in the nineteenth century. 48 Thus, we can conclude that it did not stand rolled up in a corner during Hals’s absence. The painting was f inished after July 1636 in Amsterdam by Pieter Codde, who lived at the end of the Jodenbreestraat. The painter was going through a divorce in February 1636 and possibly had to give up his own workshop then. 49 Codde dated The Meagre Company ‘A° 1637’, f ive years after the decoration of the new civic guard hall had started.50 In this case, too, the commission to complete the civic guard painting was not granted to the current assistant in Uylenburgh’s workshop, twenty-year-old Govert Flinck.51 Evidently, just like Rembrandt in 1633, he had to mind the portrait shop. As regards Uylenburgh’s personal concerns, the painting of The Meagre Company was finished just in time, for the house on the corner of the lock was sold in the summer of 1637 to

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

the competition – portraitist Nicolaes Eliaszn Pickenoy.52 Uylenburgh was then forced to look for a new work space. In December 1637 the house formerly owned by Pieter Isaacxzn, called Cronenburgh (no. 53 Sint Anthonisbreestraat), became free and Uylenburgh moved into it.53 There, at the rear of the first floor with its north light, he will have set up his studio, just as Pieter Lastman had done a bit further down the street (no. 59). The location of the new portrait shop supervised by Govert Flinck was not as good as the location at the lock. And so with respect to portrait painting Uylenburgh was shouldered aside, and Pickenoy continued the production of portrait painting in the renowned workshop at the lock. There in 1639 he completed the picture for the company of Precinct XX under Captain Dirck Tholingh,54 which was the last piece for the Kloveniersdoelen before the total decoration of the large upper hall began. For this upper hall Pickenoy portrayed the company of Precinct IV under Captain Jan Claeszn van Vlooswijck, which was awarded a central place on the back wall between Rembrandt’s Night Watch and Jacob Backer’s Company of Precinct V under Captain Cornelis de Graeff, both completed in 1642 (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, on loan from the City of Amsterdam). Given the composition and execution of Backer’s work it could well have been painted in Pickenoy’s workshop at the corner of the lock.55 In sum, most of the Amsterdam corporation paintings were made at this address – 2 Jodenbreestraat – including: group portraits by Van der Voort (two) and Rembrandt (one), and civic guard paintings by Van der Voort (four), Pickenoy (three) and possibly Backer (one).56 The Meagre Company by Frans Hals and Pieter Codde can now be added to the list.

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

Rembrandt’s Standard Bearer (fig. 1.4)57 It now becomes clear that Rembrandt had an excellent opportunity to see Hals at work and fully fathom the part of the group portrait painted by his confrere from Haarlem. Rembrandt’s 1636 standard bearer à l'antique (fig. 1.4) is inconceivable without the example of the ensign in Hals’s painting currently identified as Nicolaes Bambeeck.58 As I have suggested elsewhere, this painting may have been meant to serve as a modello for a civic guard portrait, or better as a figure symbolizing the antiquity of the civic guard institutions. Yet, it was certainly not Rembrandt’s intention to procure the commission to finish Hals’s civic guard painting, for had this been the case he would certainly have had to follow Hals’s style and colouring.59 What purpose did his Standard Bearer then serve? In 1636 Rembrandt was living at 22 Nieuwe Doelenstraat, more or less next to the recently extended Kloveniersdoelen.60 Were ideas for decorating the large upper hall in the new building already circulating? Perhaps with this painting of the standard bearer Rembrandt was angling for a share in this great project. Whatever the case may be, in his painting of The Night Watch he would not depict the ensign in keeping with his ‘modello’, although he did incorporate a few guardsmen à l'antique.61 Recent research has demonstrated that The Night Watch was part of a total decorative program for the Doelen, where it was set in the paneling and not hung separately in its own frame.62 Technical investigation of The Meagre Company ascertained that Frans Hals’s piece, like The Night Watch, was also part of the paneling and only placed in a frame when it was transferred to the Amsterdam Town Hall at the end of the seventeenth century.63 The 1.4. Rembrandt, The Standard Bearer, 1636, oil on canvas, 118.8 × 96.8 cm, private collection

25

company’s officers may have negotiated with Hals themselves in 1636, just as they had done in 1632, because without the completion of his militia piece, the New Hall (Nieuwe Sael) in the Voetboogdoelen – for which it was destined – could not be finished off. 64

Other Amsterdam Portraits by Frans Hals: The Nachtglas Portraits In his monumental study of Frans Hals (published 1970–1974), Seymour Slive discussed three small portraits on panel measuring approximately 25 × 20 cm (here figs. 1.5, 1.6, 1.7) that belong together. Even though Valentiner (1936) believed that they could have been preparatory studies for a group or a civic guard portrait, Slive kept open the possibility that they constituted a series of family portraits.65

26 

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

1.5. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Portrait of a Man, Here Identified as Pieter Jacobszn Nachtglas (1600- >1636), c. 1633, oil on panel, 24.7 × 19.7 cm, The Hague, Mauritshuis, inv. 618 1.6. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Portrait of a Young Man in a Yellow-Grey Coat, Here Identified as Elbert Jacobszn Nachtglas (1602-1655), c. 1633, oil on panel, 24.7 × 19.6 cm, Dresden, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, inv. 135 1.7. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Portrait of a Man, Here Identified as Claes Jacobszn Nachtglas (1605-1655), c. 1633, oil on panel, 24.5 × 20 cm, Dresden, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, inv. 1359

He dated the likenesses to around 1633, the time when Frans Hals began working on The Meagre Company. They would appear to have been produced in Amsterdam in that year, and not as preliminary studies for the civic guard painting of Precinct XI, but as byproducts of Hals’s activity in the Uylenburgh workshop.66 The smooth, unfinished style is in this case surprising for family portraits, and the sitters wear strikingly modern lace collars. They represent

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

the Nachtglas brothers: Pieter (1600–>1636) (f ig.  1.5), 67 the painter Elbert (1602-1655) (fig. 1.6),68 and Claes (1605–c. 1635) (fig. 1.7).69 In November 1633 the eldest brother sailed on board the Wassenaer in the service of the Dutch East India Company to the East Indies, where he was active in 1636 as a deputy merchant in Batavia.70 The young men were the sons of Jacob Pieterszn Nachtglas (1577–1654), brewer at Het Nachtglas at 16 Singel,71 who had fallen into difficulties due to the stagnation of the import of grain from Danzig after the closing of the Øresund (the Danish Sound) during the Thirty Years’ War. This is why his eldest son had to seek his fortune in the East Indies in 1633. These small likenesses were never worked up into official portraits. When Rembrandt went to the court of Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik in The Hague to portray Amalia von Solms in April 1632, he also produced two small portraits measuring approximately 30 × 25 cm of Maurits Huygens and Jacques de Gheyn III as by-products,72 just like the Nachtglas portraits Hals painted in Amsterdam in 1633. On the back of a large pastel copy of the small portrait of Pieter Nachtglas by Cornelis Ploos van Amstel the artist noted: ‘dit is ‘t Pourtret / van Pieter Jacobsz Nachtglas / in ‘t 15d jaer, dat hij als Vroedschap der Stat Amsterdam was geweest; ‘t schilderij is nog / in zijn familie. Na Frans Hals 1610 / door C.P. v. Amstel 1751’ (This is the portrait / of Pieter Jacobsz Nachtglas / in the 15th year that he had been part of the Vroedschap of Amsterdam; the painting is still / in his family. After Frans Hals 1610 / by C.P. [in ligature] v. Amstel 1751).73 Ploos’s information came from the Nagtglas family in Naarden, who had hung Hals’s painting – or more likely a copy of it – on the wall as being a portrait of their forefather. It served as proof of their distinguished descent from the Amsterdam patriciate. However, we now know that the Amsterdam Nachtglas family, which died out in

27

1699,74 was not related to the Naarden Nagtglas regents.75 Their falsified common family tree from around 1700 was published by the last male Nagtglas in 1888.76 This Frederik Nagtglas (1821–1902)77 was then no longer in possession of Hals’s portrait of his ‘forefather’.78 In this lineage the Nagtglas family overlooked the fact that in his little portrait supposedly from 1610 – eight years after the death of the ‘forefather’ – Pieter Jacobszn Nachtglas (c. 1550–1602) is wearing the clothing of his namesake grandson with a – for 1633 – highly modern lace collar. Following the settlement of his f inancial troubles, Jacob Pieterszn Nachtglas was appointed landlord of the Kloveniersdoelen in 1637.79 In his time, the great hall of the new building was being decorated by painters of the new generation: Rembrandt, Jacob Backer, Bartholomeus van der Helst, and Govert Flinck. 80 Flinck’s 1642 overmantle for the great hall featuring the four governors of the Arquebusiers civic guard includes a portrait of Jacob Pieterszn Nachtglas as the landlord holding the association’s ceremonial drinking horn.81 He had also been portrayed as a guardsman around 1610, when he was still doing well financially, by Cornelis van der Voort in the artist’s f irst militia painting. 82 After Jacob Pieterszn Nachtglas died he was succeeded as landlord by his children, beginning with Elbert Nachtglas who survived him by a mere nine months, so that his portrait only just made it into the painting of the new governors of 1655 by Bartholomeus van der Helst.83 In it we see him twenty years older, balding but with the same lank, combed back hair as in his likeness by Hals. He had been a painter in Rome around 1625, but no work by him is known. His eldest sister Geertruyt Nachtglas (1607–1699) succeeded him as landlord but stepped down after the death of their sister Aechje Nachtglas (1612–1659).84 Geertruyt was the only one of the children to marry (and well), which she did at

28 

the age of 60 in The Hague. In 1659 Rembrandt would use the back of the printed invitation to the funeral of Aechtje Nachtglas, held on 14 May in the Nieuwe Kerk, for a sketch depicting Christ and the woman taken in adultery.85

Frans Hals’s Portrait of Commander Pieter van den Broecke (fig. 1.8) Pieter van den Broecke, commander of the VOC’s (Dutch East India Company) homeward bound fleet from Batavia to the Dutch Republic, returned to Amsterdam in the summer of 1630. Born in Antwerp, he had family in Amsterdam86 and a sister living in the Grote Houtstraat in Haarlem. In 1605, he left in the service of the VOC. He was active as a senior merchant in the East Indies from 1613 to 1629. He was last charged with establishing trading

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

posts in Persia, where he was a pioneer.87 As a bachelor, he did not maintain his own household in Amsterdam; his name does not appear in the tax register of 1631 and we do not know his address there. The VOC’s headquarters in the Hoogstraat were around the corner from Uylenburgh’s workshop. And so in the summer of 1633 the 48-year-old Pieter van den Broecke will most likely have sat to Hals in Uylenburgh’s shop. Such commissions could have filled the artist’s time while waiting for sitters for the civic guard painting to show up. Compared to the Nachtglas likenesses, this portrait was much more substantial.88 Pieter van den Broecke’s journal of his travel experiences in the East Indies, illustrated with a print by Adriaen Matham after the portrait of the author by Hals, was published in Haarlem in 1634. These two men, Van den Broecke and Matham, were witnesses at the baptism of Hals’s daughter Susanna on 26 January 1634, not out of friendship (as has been been suggested in the literature) but because of the generous baptismal gift that could have been expected from Pieter van den Broecke. This raises the possibility that the commander’s likeness was not painted in Amsterdam, but rather in Haarlem shortly before. Nevertheless, Van den Broecke’s portrait provides evidence for the catalytic presence of Hals’s art in Uylenburgh’s workshop.89 Rembrandt painted his last portrait in the Uylenburgh workshop in April 1635 before moving with his pregnant wife to the Nieuwe Doelenstraat. This was the likeness of Van den Broecke’s VOC colleague, the former governor of Ambon, Philips Lucaszn.90 In 1634 he was commander of the homeward bound f leet with its precious cargo, which he managed to bring safely back to Amsterdam. He was rewarded with a gold chain from the Heren 1.8. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Portrait of Pieter van den Broecke (1585-1640), 1633, oil on canvas, 71.2 × 61 cm, London, The Iveagh Bequest, Kenwood House, inv. 51

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

XVII (Lords XVII, or the board) of the VOC, as Van den Broecke had also been. Because Philips Lucaszn was portrayed just before setting sail as a councilor to the East Indies in 1635, he must only have sat once for Rembrandt to paint his head. The rest of the painting will have been completed mostly by workshop assistants. His wife never even posed for Rembrandt and her likeness is entirely a workshop production.91 Ultimately their portraits, like the small one of Pieter Jacobszn Nachtglas, were keepsakes for the family they were leaving behind.92

Frans Hals’s Portrait of Major Nicolaes Hasselaer (fig. 1.9) The same rapid facture and striking casualness in all of these portraits also informs the likeness of the Amsterdam regent and brewer Nicolaes Hasselaer, whose business was situated at De Dubbele Adelaer in the Droogbak (nos. 2, 3, and 4).93 He wears a black suit and a very modern bobbin lace collar. As captain-major of the Amsterdam waardgelders (hired city soldiers) since 1626 Hasselaer holds his commander’s baton firmly in his right hand.94 As noted above, in the 1633 group portrait by Abraham de Vries (fig. 1.2), Hasselaer, unlike his fellow regents of the Burgerweeshuis, is not depicted in civilian black clothing, but rather unconventionally as a military commander of the city in’t gewaat als Majoor (in the attire of a major).95 He wears boots with spurs, old-fashioned grey puffy breeches with a light grey satin studded doublet, and a small flat collar with minimal lace, like the one worn by Dr. Tulp in Rembrandt’s 1632 Anatomy Lesson (fig. 1.1). He holds his commander’s staff in his right hand and his ceremonial rapier is tucked 1.9. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrik Uylenburgh, Portrait of Nicolaes Hasselaer (1593-1635), c. 1634, oil on canvas, 79.5 × 66.5 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. SK-A-1246

29

under his left arm. In his single portrait by Hals he is wearing civilian black attire. The pendant of his second wife, Sara van Diemen, shows her in a more restrained pose and executed with a more refined palette, as might be expected of an official portrait of a lady (fig. 1.10).96 Norbert Middelkoop dated the two portraits to 1633–1635.97 Because of the Amsterdam context, the date of 1633–1634 – when Hals was working in Uylenburgh’s workshop – seems more appropriate as the sitters did not travel to Haarlem. Major Nicolaes Hasselaer was just three years older than ensign Nicolaes Bambeeck of The Meagre Company; thus they belonged to the same age group. They exude a comparable sense of self-confidence in their portraits. Both wear identical lavish lace collars – the height of fashion in those days.98 Such collars rarely feature in Hals’s likenesses of male sitters in Haarlem,99 but as of 1633 this type of collar is found in most

30 

of the portraits from Uylenburgh’s workshop, both by Rembrandt and by anonymous assistants.100 Hasselaer (with a capital of 90,000 guilders in 1631), Bambeeck’s mother (with a capital of 175,000 gulden), and Jan Soop and his children (see below, with a capital of 50,000 guilders), belonged to the class that – like Pieter van den Broecke – could afford this luxury. The Nachtglas brothers’ father is not mentioned in the tax register of that year because of his financial difficulties,101 but as a brewer he was on a par with the Hasselaers. In his subordinate position as landlord of the Kloveniersdoelen, he is portrayed in Govert Flinck’s painting of the governors (discussed above) bareheaded and wearing a loose (unstarched) ruff without lace. In 1974 I.H. van Eeghen noted that the citation of the ages of Nicolaes Hasselaer and Sara van Diemen as being forty years was not correct, and that the person who donated the portraits to the

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Rijksmuseum, J. S. R. van de Poll (1805–1888), descended from a half-brother of Nicolaes Hasselaer.102 It was a casual, unsubstantiated comment. The ‘incorrect’ ages she signalled and the improbable provenance gave cause to identify the portraits by Hals as being of anonymous sitters in the museum’s new catalogue in 2007.103 Difficult for researchers to substantiate, the family lore identifying the man represented as Nicolaes Hasselaer was rejected. The provenance of the paintings via the Hasselaer-van Diemen children, however, was insufficiently researched and analysed to justify arriving at such a negative conclusion. Van Eeghen’s offhand comment unfortunately created unnecessary confusion. The paintings were known in the family until into the nineteenth century as portraying Major Hasselaer and his wife and were, in fact, correctly identified.104 A portrait of den heer majoor Hasselaer salr (deceased Mr. Major Hasselaer) was already mentioned in the estate of their daughter in 1689.105 The commander’s baton will have kept the major’s memory alive.

Frans Hals’s Portrait of Captain Jan Soop Sr. (fig. 1.11) It has been known since 1915 that the Amsterdam-Haarlem Soop family had itself portrayed by Frans Hals,106 but until now no one has been able to identify these portraits in the painter’s oeuvre. What makes them so interesting for the present discussion is the question of whether Hals painted them in Haarlem or in Amsterdam in the workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh. The name of Frans Hals does not yet appear in the earliest estate inventory of Floris Soop (1604–1657), dated 1657, nor does that 1.10. Frans Hals, workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh, Portrait of Sara Wolphaerts van Diemen (1594-1667), Second Wife of Nicolaes Hasselaer, c. 1634, oil on canvas, 79.5 × 66.5 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. SK-A-1247

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

of Rembrandt. In May 1657, the family’s large portraits were hanging – as was customary in those days – in the voorhuys (entrance hall = space running the entire width of the house) of Soop’s home, Het Glashuis, on the Kloveniersburgwal (no. 105):107 ‘t conterfeytsel van den ouden capiteijn Jan Soop Idem van Jan Soop Idem van Floris Soop Idem van Pieter Soop Idem Floris Soop soo groot als het leven. Een conterfeytsel van capiteyn Soop met een hond. (The likeness of Captain Jan Soop the Elder Ditto of Jan Soop Ditto of Floris Soop Ditto of Pieter Soop Ditto of Floris Soop lifesize. A likeness of Captain Soop with a dog).

All of the other family portraits of the older generations hung on the upper floor. In the 1661 estate inventory of Floris Soop’s cousin, Willem Schrijver (1608-1661), there appear to be three portraits attributed to Hals. They hung with other paintings in the front room on the first floor at 210 Herengracht:108 Een conterfeytsel van Sal. Petrus Scriverius door Jan Lievens gedaen109 Een conterfeytsel van de oude capiteyn Soop door Hals gedaen Een dito van den jonge Jan Soop door Hals gedaen Een dito van Floris Soop Een dito van Pieter Soop door Hals gedaen Een cleyn dito van de jonge Jan Soop.

1.11. Frans Hals, Portrait of an Officer, Here Identified as Captain Jan Soop Sr. (1578-1638), 163(1?), oil on canvas, 88 × 66 cm., São Paulo, Brazil, Museu de Arte, inv. 187 P

31

(A likeness of the late Petrus Scriverius done by Jan Lievens A likeness of the elder Captain Soop done by Hals A ditto of the younger Jan Soop done by Hals A ditto of Floris Soop A ditto of Pieter Soop done by Hals A small ditto of the younger Jan Soop.)

The mention of the painting of Floris Soop in the inventory does not state that it was painted by Frans Hals, but this is entirely within the realm of possibility. In the voorhuys at the time hung a portrait of the only member of the youngest generation, namely Willem Schrijver, Jr. (1651-1673). There were no likenesses of his parents, as one might expect: ‘Een groot stuk schilderij, daerin het conterfeijtsel van jonge Willem Schrijver in een vergulde lijst’. (A large painting, the likeness of

32 

Willem Schrijver Jr., in a gilded frame.) These were the portraits owned by Jan Soop, Sr. (1578–1638), who upon the discontinuation of the glassworks in Het Glashuis in 1622, became captain of a company of waardgelders in The Hague. Soop’s marriage portrait as a blond-haired man dressed in black, by an unknown painter, dated 1599, remained in the collection of the Hoogstraten branch of the family.110 As of 1628 his eldest son Jan (1602-1655) was captain of a company of 250 waardgelders in Amsterdam under Captain-Major Nicolaes Hasselaer. The second son, Floris, was an ensign of the civic guard of Precinct XIV when Rembrandt portrayed him as a standard bearer in 1654.111 The youngest son, Pieter (1609–1646), met an untimely death. Jan Soop, Sr. had been a widower since 1611 and his sons remained bachelors. The housekeeping was done by Annetje Abrahams (d.1653), whose portrait hung in the dining room.112 She was a

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Catholic spinster who most likely entered the household in 1611 as a nursemaid to care for the boys and continued looking after them there until her death. The Soop portraits must have been painted by Hals before the father died in 1638, but was this around 1633–1634 in Amsterdam or at another time in Haarlem? Given the family’s military orientation, it is quite improbable that the Portrait of an Anonymous Man by Frans Hals recently on the art market, the inscription on which reads (after cleaning) ÆTAT SVÆ 52 / AN° 1630 – despite the correct year of birth, and being the right size for a portrait in the entrance hall – is a likeness of the sought-after father Jan Soop.113 One would expect Jan Soop as captain of a company to be garbed in military attire and holding his commander’s baton as captain of the city soldiers, just like Nicolaes Hasselaer. The Portrait of an Officer now in Sao Paolo (fig. 1.11) has a better chance of representing Jan Soop, Sr., as a captain.114 This becomes clear when it is compared to the portraits of Commander Van den Broecke and Major Hasselaer (fig. 1.8, 1.9). The Sao Paolo officer, too, wears a gorget and holds his commander’s baton firmly in his right hand. When nearly half a century ago (1969) the portrait of Captain Soop was being sought, we primarily looked for three or four large, cohesive Hals portraits that could have hung in the voorhuys. Without any analogous portraits of his sons, the identification of Jan Soop, Sr., remained uncertain. The dating ‘163[?]’ in particular muddied the waters. This is why in 1974 Mejuffrouw van Eeghen – after the publication of Slive’s catalogue raisonné, in which the painting of the officer is dated to circa 1631 on stylistic grounds – only identified the old captain Jan Soop in passing as Slive’s 1.12. Frans Hals, Portrait of a Man, Here Identified as Captain Jan Soop Jr. (1602-1655), c. 1635-1636, oil on canvas, 86 × 69 cm, Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art, Andrew W. Mellon Collection, inv. 1937.1.68

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

number 83, then already in Sao Paolo.115 The captain’s collar is entirely in keeping with fashion in 1631, while Van den Broecke and Hasselaer wear the modish opulent collar more common in Amsterdam in 1633. This means that Jan Soop, Sr., was most likely portrayed in Haarlem, where his parents had died shortly before, in 1626 and 1628. Their houses were still the property of Floris Soop in 1657.

Frans Hals’s (Possible) Portrait of Jan Soop the Younger (fig. 1.12 and pl. 1.12) An unusual portrait by Frans Hals of an army officer wearing a cuirass and an orange sash is in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC. It is catalogued as a portrait of a member of the Haarlem civic guard, circa 1636-1638.116 However, in Hals’s day in Haarlem cuirasses were no longer painted in civic guard portraits. Unlike in the civic guards of Haarlem and Amsterdam, cuirasses remained in use in the State Army, and they are familiar to us from the officers in the oeuvre of Gerard ter Borch (1617–1681). In October 1628, Jan Soop, still only twentyfive years old, was appointed captain of a new company of 250 waardgelders in the service of the city of Amsterdam. This rank served a real military function, unlike that of captain of the civic guard. Thus, the portrayal of the sitter wearing a cuirass makes sense, leading to a possible identification for the Washington painting. It would have been executed in Haarlem, where, as noted above, the Soops maintained a residence. After the political victory that year of the Libertines (Remonstrants) over the Calvinists (Counter-Remonstrants), the city of Amsterdam hired a third company of waardgelders 1.13. Frans Hals (Circle of?), The Lute Player, Here Identified as Floris Soop (1604-1657), c. 1630-1631, oil on canvas, 82.8 × 75 cm, Dublin, National Gallery of Ireland, inv. NGI.4532

33

when the Calvinists yet again sowed unrest.117 The appointment of the young Remonstrantoriented Soop stirred up more trouble, but in the end the Libertine governance under the Hasselaers, Bickers and De Graeffs had to be recognized.118 After Jan Soop, Jr. died, the city of Amsterdam bought the arms of his private army from his estate in 1656. Hence, they were not found at Het Glashuis in either the captain’s chamber or the arms chamber in 1657; nor were his cuirass or his father’s gorget, although two banners and a child’s suit of armor were still there.119

Frans Hals’s Portrait of Floris Soop as a Lutenist (fig. 1.13) The portrait of Floris Soop in the voorhuys is not mentioned as being by Hals, but he may well be identifiable in an entirely different context. In 1709 ‘een staand mannetje zijnde de vermaarde

1.14. Rembrandt, Portrait of a Man Rising from his Chair, 1633, oil on canvas, 124 × 99 cm, Cincinnati, Taft Museum, Bequest of Mr. and Mrs. Charles Phelps Taft, inv. 1931.409

lutanist Soop door Hals’ (a standing man being the celebrated lute player Soop by Hals) in the estate of the painter and art dealer Allard van Everdingen went under the hammer in Amsterdam.120 This could very possibly be The Lute Player with the interlaced monogram FH, in the National Gallery of Ireland in Dublin, which was rejected by Slive (fig. 1.13).121 In this context, it is worth recalling that in 1657 the following objects were found in the music room of Het Glashuis: Een luyt in een cas drie violen de gamba een conterfeytsel van Floris Stoop. (A lute in a case three viola de gambas a likeness of Floris Soop.)

1.15. Rembrandt, Portrait of a Young Woman with a Fan, 1633, oil on canvas, 125.7 × 101 cm, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of Helen Swift Neilson, 1943, inv. 43

The Lute Player has suffered some abrasion, leading Slive to reject it as being by Hals despite the signature FH (in ligature). In the catalogue of the museum in Dublin it is called ‘Circle of Frans Hals’ and dated around 1630. This points to a youthful portrait of Floris Soop from the workshop in Haarlem, most likely by the master himself. The Van Everdingen auction of 1709 also included een vaandrager van Rembrant (a standard bearer by Rembrandt) as lot number 34. Here we are talking about Rembrandt’s 1654 painting of the aged ensign, now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, identified by Mejuffrouw I.H. van Eeghen in 1971 as the fifty-year-old Floris Soop.122 In 1657 this portrait (without mention of its painter) was listed in the inventory as hanging in the voorhuys of Het Glashuis: (the likeness

1.16. Rembrandt, Portrait of Marten Soolmans (1613-1641), 1634, oil on canvas, 207.5 cm × 132 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. SK-A-5033 (and Paris, Musée du Louvre)

1.17. Rembrandt, Portrait of Oopjen Coppit (1611-1689), 1634, oil on canvas, 207.5 × 132 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. SK-C-1768 (and Paris, Musée du Louvre)

of) Floris Soop soo groot als het leven (Floris Soop, life size) (see list above).123 The portraits of Floris Soop as a young lutenist by Frans Hals and as an elderly ensign by Rembrandt were not mentioned in Willem Schrijver’s 1661 estate inventory and therefore his name cannot be included in the provenance of these paintings; they will have come onto the market via his brother Hendrick Schrijver (1605–1665), bailiff, dike-reeve, and sheriff of Oudewater.124

Amstelodamum as the repositioning of commas in the artist’s biography. However, I see this current contribution as an exclamation point because it may well result in a completely new chapter in our understanding of the painter’s development. What could the more mature, fifty-year-old Frans Hals have taught the not yet independently established, much younger Rembrandt when they both shared Uylenburgh’s studio for a few brief periods of time, lodging there, daily breaking bread together? Neither of them ever went to Italy; neither knew Rome. However, during the Twelve Years’ Truce, around 1616, Frans Hals did spend some time in Antwerp in the surroundings of Pieter Paul Rubens, Anthony van Dyck, and Jacob Jordaens,125 with whom Hendrick Uylenburgh

Art Historical Consequences of the Encounter Mejuffrouw I.H. van Eeghen referred teasingly to our articles about Rembrandt in

36 

was also familiar in those years. What of their experiences on the Schelde could Hals and Uylenburgh have shared with Rembrandt? At Uylenburgh’s did they talk about Rubens and his workshop, or about Rubens’s visit to Hals’s workshop in Haarlem in 1627, and in 1632 Van Dyck’s visit to Holland?126 There is enough grist here for an entire book. However, nothing has come down to us on paper. Accordingly, the products from Uylenburgh’s workshop will have to be investigated for the stylistic, technical, and iconographic links among artists that they may reveal. This would afford a glimpse into the development of Amsterdam portraiture, which could yield a comprehensive study. Its implications can only be touched upon here. After The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, Rembrandt displays an interest in the interaction between sitters, such as in his double portraits of the shipbuilder Rijcksen and his wife (1633), and later of the Mennonite preacher Cornelis Anslo and his wife (1641).127 We also discern this in individual portraits, such as the pendants of an anonymous couple from 1633 (now divided between Cincinnati and New York), which exhibit an unprecedentedly lively interaction between the sitters (fig. 1.14, 1.15).128 In my opinion, up until then such exuberance would have been regarded as conflicting utterly with the dignity of those portrayed. This new liveliness may have been Frans Hals’s contribution when he was active in Hendrick Uylenburgh’s workshop, through his portrait of Pieter van den Broecke, for instance. And is it not possible that the layout of The Meagre Company informed Rembrandt’s life-size portraits of Marten Soolmans and Oopjen Coppit of 1634 (fig. 1.16, 1.17 and pl. 1.16, 1.17)?129 These portraits are closely linked in pose to that of Ensign Nicolaes Bambeeck in The Meagre Company. The pinnacle of informality was reached ten years later with Hals’s marriage portraits of Stephanus Geraerds and

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Isabella Coymans, painted around 1645,130 a few years after Rembrandt’s brilliant 1641 marriage portraits of Hals’s standard bearer, Nicolaes Bambeeck, and Agatha Bas.131 It is hardly a coincidence that in 1986 Ernst van de Wetering explained the presence of various hands in Uylenburgh’s workshop on the basis of the lace collars.132 This evolving fashion trend is one of the more characteristic features of the portraits coming from this workshop. At that time there was enough knowledge available in the Rembrandt Research Project to be able to distinguish various hands, but not their identity. Rivalry with Frans Hals was not yet part of art historical thinking about Rembrandt, but now it deserves our attention and warrants further investigation. What the assistants were busy doing can perhaps best be clarified by considering the static rendering of such a collar in De Vries’s regent portrait of 1633 (fig. 1.2), in which Gerard Schaep, on the far left, is the only sitter portrayed with a modern bobbin lace collar resting artlessly on his shoulders as though on a mannequin. This is not the impression made in the portraits produced in Uylenburgh’s workshop by Rembrandt and Hals. In the years 1633–1634, Uylenburgh had a booming clientele. When Hals stayed in Haarlem in 1635 and Rembrandt stopped painting portraits, Flinck was still too young to take up this task, but this is exactly the moment when Dirck Dirckszn van Santvoort began working as an independent portraitist,133 with a fine reputation for painting lace.134 His presence in Uylenburgh’s workshop has long been surmised.135 Was he one of the anonymous assistants working on the lace collars?

Notes 1.

Research for this contribution was con­ cluded in November 2011, and the final

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

2.

3.

4. 5.

revision in April 2014. With thanks to Marten Jan Bok and Norbert Middelkoop, as well as Jan Six, Marieke de Winkel, Pieter Biesboer and Martin Bijl. See S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, De jonge Rembrandt onder tijdgenoten, Ph.D. dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen 2006, p. 116, n. 182: ‘Mogelijk werd het schuttersstuk in 1633 bij Hendrick Uylenburgh besteld, die daarop Frans Hals voor de uitvoering ervan heeft aangetrokken; net zoals hij in 1632 Rembrandt voor de uitvoe­ ring van De anatomische les van Dr. Tulp had aangezocht. […] Na enkele zittingen kwam Frans Hals niet meer naar Amsterdam. Na opheffing van de werkplaats van Uylenburgh bij de sluis door het vertrek van Rembrandt en de verhuizing van Uylenburgh naar een ander adres, bleef het schuttersstuk onvoltooid achter […] De wijkgenoot Pieter Codde kreeg toen de opdracht het stuk te voltooien.’ Filip Vermeylen, Painting for the Market. Commercialization of Art in Antwerp’s Golden Age (Turnhout: Brepols, 2003), p. 62; Marten Jan Bok, ‘“Schilderien te coop”. Nieuwe marketing technieken op de Nederlandse kunstmarkt van de Gouden Eeuw’, in: idem. et al., Thuis in de Gouden Eeuw. Kleine meesterwerken uit de SØR Rusche collectie, Kunsthal, Rotterdam, 2008, pp. 9–29 (pp. 10–11). Jaap van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh, factor van de Poolse koning en kunsthandelaar te Amsterdam’, in: Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Son. Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De Lairesse 1625-1675, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam, and Dulwich Picture Gallery, London, 2006, pp. 12-59 (pp. 45-51). Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, p. 56, fig. 26. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt, his Wife, the Nursemaid and the Servant’, in: Julia Lloyd Williams (ed.), Rembrandt’s Women, National Galleries of Scotland, Edinburgh, and Royal Academy, London, 2001, pp. 18–27 (pp. 21–22); Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, pp. 314–371, ‘Toen hingen er burgers als vorsten aan de muur’, esp. 330-337: ‘Een portretwerk­ plaats in de Sint Anthonisbreestraat’.

37

6. Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, pp. 78-81, fig. 34; S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘The Birth of an Artists’ Quarter – Pieter Isaacsz’s Amsterdam Years’, in: Badeloch Noldus and Juliette Roding (eds), Pieter Isaacsz (1568–1625). Court Painter, Art Dealer and Spy (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), pp. 164–179 (pp. 74–91). 7. Dudok van Heel, ‘Birth of an Artists’ Quarter’, p. 81. In 1603 Pieter Isaacxzn had a house built across from that of Van der Voort at the other corner of the lock (1 Jodenbreestraat), where he also must have had a workshop before his departure for Denmark; Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, pp. 54–56. 8. Hugo Johannsen, ‘Christian IV’s Private Oratory in Frederiksborg Castle Chapel – Reconstruction and Interpretation’, in: Noldus and Roding, pp. 164–179 (pp. 167–168). 9. Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, pp. 45–51. 10. Ibid., p. 47, n. 137. 11. Josua Bruyn, ‘Rembrandt’s Workplace: Function and Production’, in: Christopher Brown et al., Rembrandt. The Master and his Workshop, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, and National Gallery, London, 1991, 2 vols, I, pp. 68–89. 12. Ernst van de Wetering, Studies in the Workshop Practice of the Early Rembrandt, PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam, 1986, p. 58. 13. Marten Jan Bok, ‘Een Ganymedes van François Badens en de werkplaats voor schilderijen in Italiaanse stijl aan de Oude Turfmarkt’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 92:4 (2005), pp. 3-14. 14. Marten Jan Bok, ‘Eigenhandigheid’, Kunstschrift 5/1991 (1991), pp. 9–10; Friso Lammertse, ‘Van Dyck’s Apostles Series, Hendrick Uylenburgh and Sigismund III’, Burlington Magazine 144 (March 2002), pp. 140–146; Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, pp. 32–38. 15. Max Rooses, ‘De vreemde reizigers Rubens of zijn huis bezoekende’, Rubens-Bulletin 5 (1910), pp. 221–222. 16. Corpus VI 76. 17. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Dr. Nicolaes Tulp alias Claes Pieterszn. Dignity between Simplicity and Splendor’, in: idem., Nicolaes Tulp. The Life and Work of an Amsterdam Physician and

38 

18.

19.

20.

21. 22. 23. 24.

25.

26.

27.

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

Magistrate in the 17th Century (Amsterdam: Six Art Promotion, 1998), pp. 41–115 (p. 58, family tree III). Norbert E. Middelkoop, ‘“Groote kostelijke Schilderyen, alle die de Kunst der Heelmeesters aangaan”. De schilderijenverzameling van het Amsterdamse Chirur­ gijnsgilde’, in: Norbert E. Middelkoop et al., Rembrandt onder het mes. De anatomische les van Dr Nicolaes Tulp ontleed, Mauritshuis, The Hague, 1998, pp. 9–38 (p. 14). Norbert E. Middelkoop, De oude meesters van de stad Amsterdam. Schilderijen tot 1800 (Bussum: Thoth, 2008), p. 235, SA 7312 and 7313; see also pp. 92–93. The preparatory study is dated: 27 Nove[m]b[ris] 1630; Marijke Carasso-Kok and J. Levyvan Halm (eds), Schutters in Holland. Kracht en zenuwen van de stad, Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem, 1988, pp. 377, 378, cat. 192, fig. 182. Middelkoop, Oude meesters, p. 221, SA 7353 and 7354. Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, pp. 116-117, no. 182. He signed a document in Leiden on 19 November 1631 concerning the instruction of Isaac de Jouderville; Strauss, Doc. 1631/9. Strauss, Doc. 1631/4, dated 20–6–1631; John ­Michael Montias, Art at Auction in Seventeenth-Century Amsterdam (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2004), p. 122; Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, pp. 24–25. Christian Tico Seifert, Pieter Lastman. Studien zu Leben und Werk. Mit einem kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke mit Themen aus der antiken Mythologie und Historie (Petersberg: Michael Imhof, 2011), pp. 54–56, fig. 40. Kees Walle, Buurthouden. De geschiedenis van burengebruiken en buurtorganisaties in Leiden (14e–19e eeuw) (Leiden: Gingko, 2005), pp. 74–75 and 130–132; for Pelikaanshoek, see maps of Leiden in Strauss, Documents, pp. 26 and 44. Jan Lievens, who produced larger paintings during his Leiden period, lived in the Pieters­ kerkkoorsteeg, where his parents inhabited a larger middle-class shop premises; see Roelof van Straten, The Leiden Years, 1606-1632 (Leiden: Foleor, 2005), pp. 14–15, Joan Blaeu,

28. 29.

30. 31.

32.

33.

34. 35.

36.

map of Leiden from c. 1633 (‘c’: the house of Lievens’s parents). Portrait of Nicolaes Ruts, New York, Frick Collection, 1631, oil on panel, 116 × 87 cm; Corpus VI 59. Portrait of a Notary, Saint Petersburg, Hermitage, 1631, oil on canvas, 104.4 × 91.8 cm; Corpus VI 60. This is not the twenty-five-year-old notary Jacob Bruyningh (1605–1655), as suggested by Van de Wetering in Corpus VI, p. 510. The protocol on his lectern is much too large. Rembrandt often rendered folios in a disproportionate size. Portrait of Marten Looten, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, oil on panel, 92.8 × 74.9 cm, dated 17 January 1632; Corpus VI 72. Petria Noble and Jurgen Wadum, ‘De restauratie van De Anatomische les van Dr. Nicolaes Tulp’, in: The Hague 1998, pp. 51–74 (pp. 68–69). S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669): een veranderend schildersportret’, in: Berlin/Amsterdam/London 1991, pp. 50-67 (p. 54); Corpus VI 65 b. Norbert E. Middelkoop, ‘“Met schuttersschilderijen behangen”. De Amsterdamse schutterstukken in de drie Doelens’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 105 (2013), pp. 12-107 (pp. 58–69, 92). Middelkoop, Oude meesters, p. 235, SA 7312 and 7313 (see also pp. 92–93). Jacob Backer, Regentesses of the Burgerweeshuis, c. 1634, oil on canvas, 238 × 274 cm, Amsterdam, Amsterdam Museum; Rudolf E.O. Ekkart, ‘Abraham de Vries, een Hollandse portrettist in Frankrijk en de Zuidelijke Nederlanden’, in: Katlijne van der Stighelen (ed.), Munuscula Amicorum: Contributions on Rubens and his Colleagues in Honour of Hans Vlieghe, 2 vols (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), II, pp. 549–564 (pp. 555–557); Middelkoop, Oude meesters, pp. 94–95; Peter van den Brink and Jaap van der Veen, Jacob Backer (1608/09–1651), Museum Het Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam, and Suermondt-Ludwig-Museum, Aachen (Zwolle: Waanders), 2008-2009, pp. 100-103, cat. 8. J.A. Jochems and N. De Roever, Amsterdams oude burgervendels (schutterij) 1580-1795 (Amsterdam: Van Looy, 1888), p. 35; J.G. and P.J.

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

37.

38.

39. 40. 41. 42.

43. 44.

45.

46.

47. 48.

Frederiks, Kohier van de tweehonderdste penning over Amsterdam en onderhorige plaatsen over 1631 (Amsterdam: Ten Brink & De Vries, 1890), p. 35; Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, p. 116, n. 182. Seymour Slive, Frans Hals, 3 vols (London: Phaidon, 1970–1974), III (1974), cat. 80; 2nd, rev., ed. (London: Phaidon, 2014), cat. 80 (the earlier catalogue is retained in this edition); Claus Grimm, Frans Hals. The Complete Work (New York: Abrams, 1990), cat. 70. Neeltje Köhler and Koos Levy-van Halm, Frans Hals. Militia Pieces (Maarsen: SDU, 1990), pp. 32-37; Norbert E. Middelkoop, ‘Kruisbestui­ ving. Schutters- en regentenstukken in Haarlem en Amsterdam’, Kunstschrift 2014:4 (2014), pp. 26–35, pp. 29–32. Rembrandt, Portrait of Jan Rijcksen and Griet Jans (The Shipbuilder and his Wife), London, Royal Collection, Corpus VI 89. Rembrandt, Portrait of Rev. Johannes Wtenbogaert, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; Corpus VI 90; Strauss, Doc. 1633/2, 13–4–1633. Corpus VI 88 a–b, discusssed below. Seymour Slive (ed.), Frans Hals, National Gallery of Art, Washington, Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem, and Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1989, p. 389, Doc. 74, dated 20–3–1636. Strauss, Doc. 1632/2, dated 26–7–1632. Isabella H. van Eeghen, ‘Het Amsterdamse Sint Lucasgilde in de 17de eeuw’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 61 (1969), pp. 65–102, esp. 85–86. Washington/Haarlem/London 1989, p. 387, Doc. 66, dated 14–8–1634; Montias, Art at Auction, pp. 21–22; Mieke C. Breij, Een vigilante familie. Het geslacht Van Beuningen in Amsterdam en Utrecht (Maasbergen: Stichting Esse Non Videri, 2013), pp. 149–150. Rembrandt and Saskia van Uylenburgh married on 22 June 1634 (7 July 1634 in contemporary reckoning) as noted in the Kerkboek of Sint Anna Parochie in Leeuwarden; Strauss, Doc. 1634/5. Washington/Haarlem/London 1989, pp. 389391, Docs. 73-78, dated 19-3-1636 to 26-7-1636. Martin Bijl, ‘The Meagre Company and Frans Hals’s Working Method’, in Washington/Haarlem/London, 1989, pp. 103–108 (p. 104).

39

49. Isabella H. van Eeghen, ‘Pieter Codde en Frans Hals’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 61 (1974), pp. 137–140 (p. 140). 50. Washington/Haarlem/London 1989, pp. 252–257, cat. 43. 51. Jaap van der Veen, ‘Het kunstbedrijf van ­Hendrick Uylenburgh in Amsterdam. Productie en handel tussen 1625 en 1655’, in: Amsterdam/London 2006, pp. 117-205 (pp. 160-169). 52. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘De schilder Nicolaes Eliaszn Pickenoy (1588–1650/56) en zijn familie’, in: Willem J. Kolff et al., Liber amicorum Jhr. Mr. C.C. van Valkenburg (‘s-Gravenhage: Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, 1985), pp. 152–160 (p. 156). 53. Van der Veen, ‘Hendrick Uylenburgh’, pp. 54-55. 54. In Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, pp. 117–118, n. 200, it was suggested that Frans Hals and Pieter Codde worked in one of the rented houses of the Leprooshuis, but this assertion is no longer tenable; see Middelkoop, Oude meesters, p. 235, SA 7314. 55. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘The Night Watch and the Entry of Marie de’Medici. A New Interpretation of the Original Place and Significance of the Painting’, Rijksmuseum Bulletin 57 (2009), pp. 4–41 (p. 25). 56. Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, p. 117, n. 200. 57. Corpus VI 147. 58. Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, p. 116, n. 162, figs. 37–38. 59. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt en de vaandrigs van de Amsterdamse schutterij. ­Diende Rembrandt’s “vaandeldrager” uit 1636 als “modello”?’, Kroniek van Het Rembrandthuis 93/2 (1993), pp. 15–24. 60. Middelkoop, ‘Schutterschilderijen’, p. 69 and n. 188. 61. Rembrandt, Militia Company of District II under the Command of Capt. Frans Banning Cocq, known as the Night Watch, 1642, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; Corpus VI 190; Dudok van Heel, ‘The Night Watch’, esp. 29–34: ‘Fantasy and Reality in the Guardsmen’s Dress’. 62. Dudok van Heel, ‘The Night Watch’, pp. 19–25: ‘The Decoration of the Great Upper Hall of the Kloveniersdoelen’; H. Colenbrander, ‘De

40 

63. 64. 65.

66. 67. 68. 69.

70. 71.

72. 73.

74. 75. 76.

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

decoratie van de Grote Zaal van de Kloveniersdoelen. Een vooropgezet plan?’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 105 (2013), pp. 219–236. Bijl, ‘Meagre Company’, p. 104. Middelkoop, ‘Schutterschilderijen’, p. 92. Slive, Hals, I, p. 124, and III, pp. 53–54, cats. 90–92 (preparatory studies for a group portrait that was never executed); 2nd ed (2014), pp. 30, 177, 257, 412, figs. 119–121. Dendrochronological analysis could provide crucial information in this instance. Slive, Hals, cat. 92; Grimm, cat. 67. Slive, Hals, cat. 90; Grimm, cat. 65. Slive, Hals, cat. 91; Grimm, cat. 66; S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘De familie van Pieter ­Cornelisz Hooft’, Jaarboek Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie 35 (1981), pp. 68–108, esp. 75-77; S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, Van Amsterdamse burgers tot Europese aristocraten (The Hague: Koninklijk Nederlandsch Genootschap voor Geslacht- en Wapenkunde, 2008), pp. 290–292, figs. 70–72. François Valentijn, Oud en Nieuw Oost-Indiën, 5 vols (Dordrecht: Johannes van Braam, 1724–1726), III, p. 15. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Vroege brouwerijen aan de Amstel in de vijftiende en zestiende eeuw’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 82 (1990), pp. 23–74 (pp. 57–59: ‘t Claverblat). Maurits Huygens, Hamburg, Kunsthalle, Corpus VI 67; Jacques de Gheyn III, London, Dulwich Picture Gallery, Corpus VI 68. Cornelis Ploos van Amstel after Frans Hals, Portrait of Pieter Jacobsz Nachtglas, 1751, pastel, 385 × 311 mm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; Jan W. Niemeyer, ‘Ploos als uitvoerend kunstenaar en ontwerper’, in: Th. Laurentius et al., Cornelis Ploos van Amstel, kunstverzamelaar en uitgever (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1980), pp. 132-167 (pp. 145-146), cat. A3, fig. 61. Dudok van Heel, ‘Hooft’, pp. 75-77; Dudok van Heel, Amsterdamse burgers, pp. 290–292. Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, ‘Nagtglas’, Nederland’s Patriciaat 20 (1931/1932), pp. 151–157. A.A. Vorsterman van Oijen, Stam- en wapenboek van aanzienlijke Nederlandsche familien, met genealogische en heraldische aantekeningen, 3 vols (Groningen: J.B. Wolters, 1885-1890), II (1888), pp. 362–364.

77. P.C. Molhuysen and P.J. Blok (eds), Nieuwe Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek, 10 vols (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1911–1937), IV (1918), col. 1018, and VIII (1930), cols. 1202–1203. 78. Ernst Wilhelm Moes, Iconographia Batava, 2 vols (Amsterdam: F. Muller, 1905), II, p. 130. 79. Judith van Gent and Maarten Hell, ‘De Doelens als herbergen en ontvangstcentra (1530–1700)’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 105 (2013), pp. 276–326 (pp. 299–303). 80. Dudok van Heel, ‘The Night Watch’, pp. 5–13. 81. Govert Flinck, Governors of the Kloveniersdoelen, 1642, Amsterdam, Amsterdam Museum, inv. SA 7316. 82. Middelkoop, ‘Schuttersschilderijen’, p. 82, fig. 46; Norbert E. Middelkoop, ‘Chronolo­ gische lijst van de Amsterdamse schutters­ stukken’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 105 (2013), pp. 343–363 (p. 355, no. 62 and p. 360, no. 81). 83. Bartholomeus van der Helst, Governors of the Kloveniersdoelen, 1655, Amsterdam Museum, inv. SA 2101. 84. Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Archive 5075, no. 1129, Notary J. van de Ven, f 294–296, 26 June 1659: will of Geertruyt Nachtglas with many bequests, including to cousin Jacob Claeszn van Naerden, cousin Jannetje Colijn, the wife of Joannes Kieft. The heir is her cousin Weyntje Lamberts van der Mije, the wife of Jacob Hooft. 85. Rembrandt, Christ and the Woman taken in Adultery, drawing in pen and brown ink touched with wash, Munich, Kupferstich­ kabinett, Ben. 1047; Thea Vignau-Wilberg, Rembrandt auf Papier. Werk und Wirkung / Rembrandt and his Followers. Drawings from Munich, Staatlichen Graphischen Sammlung, Munich, 2001, pp. 235-238, cat. 64 (for verso, see p. 236, fig. 1); Dudok van Heel, Amsterdamse burgers, p. 292, figs. 73-74. 86. J.G. van Dillen, Het oudste aandeelhouders­ register van de Kamer Amsterdam der OostIndische Compagnie (‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1958), p. 161. 87. Martine Gosselink, ‘“In alle de weerelt en vindt men de Zijtwoormen niet zo vele”. De VOC in Perzië’, in: Lodewijk Wagenaar (ed.), Aan de overkant. Ontmoetingen in dienst van

1. Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Work shop of Hendrick Uylenburgh

de VOC en WIC (1600–1800) (Leiden: Sidestone Press, 2015), pp. 257-274 (pp. 257-258). 88. Washington/London/Haarlem 1989, pp. 258–260, cat. 44. 89. Corpus VI 88 a and b. 90. Rembrandt and workshop, Portrait of Philips Lucasz, London, National Gallery, Corpus VI 132a; Jos Lambeek-Huijzen, Kant op portretten uit de Gouden Eeuw. Een onderzoek naar de bruikbaarheid van portretten voor de kantgeschiedenis, 2 vols, Master’s thesis, Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit, 1998, I, p. 54, fig. 59. 91. Rembrandt and workshop, Portrait of ­Petronella Buys, whereabouts unknown, ­Corpus VI 132b. 92. Isabella H. van Eeghen, ‘De portretten van Philips Lucas en Petronella Buys’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 43 (1956), p. 116. 93. Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt van Rijn’, pp. 32, 52, ill. 94. Slive, Hals, cat. 86; Grimm, cat. 73. 95. Norbert E. Middelkoop, ‘Hollandse meesters voor Australië: onderzoek naar zeven schilderijen voor de tentoonstelling The Golden Age of Dutch Art’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 47 (1999), pp. 175-197 (pp. 179–181, fig. 7). 96. Slive, Hals, cat. 87; Grimm, cat. 74. 97. Norbert E. Middelkoop, The Golden Age of Dutch Art. Seventeenth Century Paintings from the Rijksmuseum and Australian Collections, Catalogue the Art Gallery of Western Australia, Art Gallery of Western Australia, Perth, 1997, pp. 76–79, cats. 26–27. 98. Lambek-Huijzen, p. 50, fig. 9 AB. 99. Exceptions are the Nachtglas portraits and the portrait of Pieter van den Broecke; LambeckHuijzen, p. 54, fig. 59. 100. Van de Wetering, Studies, pp. 66–71, figs. 5, 6, 7, 14. 101. Frederiks and Frederiks, p. 55 no. 123: Major Hasselaer; p. 36 no. 99: the widow of Bambeeck; p. 51, nos. 93 and 94: Jan Soop and children; and p. 14, missing between nos. 59 and 60 is Nachtglas on the corner of the Brouwersgracht and the Singel. 102. Van Eeghen, ‘Pieter Codde’, p. 138. 103. Jonathan Bikker et al. (eds), Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century in the Rijksmuseum

41

Amsterdam, I. Artists Born between 1570 and 1600 (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2007), pp. 173–175, cats. 106–107. Correctly rejected is the provenance via Aegje Hasselaer (1617-1664), daughter of Nicolaes Hasselaer’s half brother Dirck Hasselaer (1581–1645) to the daughter Brechtje Hooft (1640-1721), married to Harmen van de Poll (1641-1673). 104. S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Hals portretten van majoor Nicolaes Hasselaer (1593–1635) en zijn vrouw in ere hersteld’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 20:4 (2015), pp. 139-146. 105. Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Archive 5075, no. 3479, Notary J. Paerslaken, 5–1–1689. 106. Abraham Bredius, Künstler-Inventare. Urkunden zur Geschichte der Holländischen Kunst des XVI, XVII und XVIII Jahrhunderts, 8 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1915–1922), I, p. 216, 26–10–1661; Johan E. Elias, De vroed­ schap van Amsterdam, 1578–1795, 2 vols (Haarlem: Loosjes, 1903-1905); Slive, Hals, II, pls. 60, 61; III, pp. 22–23, cats. 36–37. Petrus Scriverius (1575-1660) was Jan Soop’s brother. 107. Isabella H. van Eeghen, ‘De vaandeldrager van Rembrandt’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 58 (1971), pp. 173–181 (p. 180). 108. Washington/Haarlem/London 1989, pp. 409–410, doc. 16-10-1661. 109. Egbert J. Wolleswinkel, ‘De portretten van Petrus Scriverius en zijn familie’, Jaarboek Centraal Bureau voor de Geneaologie 31 (1977), pp. 105–119 (p. 119 no. C, unknown). 110. Anonymous, Portrait of Jan Soop, Sr., oil on panel, 99 × 80 cm, inscribed Anno 1599 / aet. 21; Wolleswinkel, ‘Portretten’, p. 111, fig. 8. 111. Rembrandt, The Standard Bearer (Portrait of Floris Soop), 1654, oil on canvas, 140.3 × 114.9 cm, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art; Corpus VI 234; Walter A. Liedtke, Dutch Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2 vols (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007), II, p. 656, cat. 152. 112. Van Eeghen, ‘Vaandeldrager’, p. 180; S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Een donatie inter vivos door Floris Soop’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 59 (1972), p. 56. 113. Frans Hals, Portrait of a Gentleman, oil on canvas, 115 × 89.5 cm; Slive, Hals, II, pl. 313, III,

42 

p. 70, cat. 130; Christopher D. M. Atkins, Frans Hals (Antwerp 1581/5-1666 Haarlem). Portrait of a Gentleman, Standing Three-quarter length, Wearing a Black Costume and a Lace Ruff, Holding a Hat and Gloves (New York: Otto Naumann Ltd., 2010). 114. Portrait of an Officer, signed AETAT. 52 (?) / Ao 163[?] / FH; Slive, Hals, III, pp. 50–51, cat. 83; Grimm, cat. 75; not mentioned in Slive, Hals, 2nd ed. (2014); Frans Grijzenhout, ‘Frans Hals. De oude kapitein Soop en zijn zonen’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 102:1 (2015), pp. 14-29. 115. Van Eeghen, ‘Pieter Codde’, pp. 137–140 (p. 137); Slive, Hals, III, p. 50, n. 83. 116. Slive, Hals, III, cat. 125; not mentioned in Slive, Hals, 2nd ed. (2014); Grimm, cat. 100; Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century. NGA, Online editions: http:// www.nga.gov/content/ngaweb/research/ online-editions/17th-century-dutch-paintings. html. 117. Dudok van Heel, Jonge Rembrandt, pp. 32-36. 118. Jan Wagenaar, Amsterdam in zyne opkomst, aanwas, geschiedenissen, voorregten, koophandel, gebouwen, kerkenstaat, schoolen, schutterye, guilden en regeeringe beschreeven, 3 vols (Amsterdam: Tirion, 1760-1767), I, pp. 497–504 (p. 499). Jan Hendrickszn Soop is here called a captain (military rank), but in notarial deeds of 1629 and 1633 he is called a hopman (Hauptman, captain or leader) of a company of guardsmen or soldiers garrisoned in The Hague (Van Eeghen, ‘Vaandeldrager’, p. 178), thus this must refer to Jan Soop, Jr. 119. For the other weaponry, see Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt en de vaandrigs’, p. 21. 120. Frits Lugt, Répertoire des catalogues de ventes publiques, 4 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1938–1964), I, no. 220, Amsterdam 19 April 1709, lot no. 30. 121. Slive, Hals, III, p. 137, no. D25. 122. See above, n. 111. 123. Van Eeghen, ‘Vaandeldrager’; Liedtke, Dutch Paintings, pp. 655–661, cat. 152. 124. Egbert J. Wolleswinkel, ‘De portretverzameling van Mr. Jan Willem Hoogstraten (1722-1770)’, Jaarboek van het Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie 34 (1980), pp. 79–98 (p. 93).

S.A.C. Dudok van Heel

125. Walter A. Liedtke, ‘Frans Hals: Style and Substance’, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 69:1 (Summer 2011), pp. 5–48 (pp. 12–21). 126. Van Dyck’s visit to Haarlem (reported by Arnold Houbraken) remains questionable; Christopher D.M. Atkins, The Signature Style of Frans Hals, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012, p. 96. However, Anna Tummers has argued that the fact that the Haarlem painter Hendrick Pot was recruited as a portrait painter for the English court in 1632 suggests that Van Dyck must have visited Haarlem, where Hals may even have been his first choice; Anna Tummers (ed.) et al., Frans Hals Eye to Eye with Rembrandt, Rubens and Titian, Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem, 2013, pp. 37, 120, cat. 24. 127. Portrait of the Shipbuilder Jan Rijcksen and his Wife Griet Jans, 1633, London, Royal Collection; Portrait of the Mennonite Preacher Cornelis Claesz Anslo and his Wife Aaltje Gerritsdr Schouten, 1641, Berlin, Gemäldegalerie; Corpus VI 89, 183. 128. Corpus VI 78-79; Liedtke, Dutch Paintings, pp. 589–596, cat. 146. 129. Corpus VI 120a-b; Jonathan Bikker, Marten and Oopjen: Two Monumental Portraits by Rembrandt (Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2016); Erik Spaans, ‘Rembrandts “Marten” oogt als een Frans Hals’, Trouw (29 June 2016), pp. 14–15. See also Christopher D.M. Atkins, ‘Frans Hals in Amsterdam and his Impact on Rembrandt’, in: Haarlem 2013, pp. 55-70 (pp. 64–65). 130. Frans Hals, Portrait of Stephanus Geraerds (