Chapter 2

[3] The date is unquestionably difficult to read. Bartsch misread it as 1636 (op. cit., p. 148). Charles Middleton (_Descriptive Catalogue of the Etched Work of Rembrandt van Ryn_, London, 1878, p. 299) was the first to identify the date as 1650. This has been accepted by all modern authorities except George Bioerklund (_Rembrandt's Etchings: True and False_, Stockholm, 1955, no. 52-A, p. 103) who reads it as 1652. This seems unlikely to me, not only on the great stylistic affinity of this print to Rembrandt's unquestioned works of 1650, but also on the basis of my own reading of the date. The presumed digit "2" is quite unlike the "2" in Hind's 257 and 263, Rembrandt's only dated prints of 1652. (_See_ figure 16.)

[4] The general location of this scene, as well as many others in Rembrandt's oeuvre, has been identified by Frits Lugt (_Mit Rembrandt in Amsterdam_, Berlin, 1920, pp. 136-140, revised from the original Dutch, _Wandelingen met Rembrandt in en om Amsterdam_, Amsterdam, 1915; see also +Lugt+, "Rembrandt's Amsterdam," _Print Collector's Quarterly_, April 1915, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 111-169, and the attached map).

[5] +Cornelis Hofstede de Groot+, ed., _Die Urkunden ueber Rembrandt (1575-1721)_, The Hague, 1906. On the lawsuit, see nos. 113, 117, 118, 120-3, 130, and 165. Geertghe was taken to the institution on July 4, 1650.

[6] On the financial troubles, starting in 1653, see ibid., nos. 140 ff.

[7] The exact number is, of course, impossible to determine, because of many uncertainties of attribution and dating. A. M. Hind, op. cit., lists 236 prints before the year 1650, which seems as accurate a count as is possible.

[8] According to Hind, op. cit., the 14 landscapes nos. 237-260 and 262-264 are attributable to the years 1650-52. Of the 27 prints from these three years, 16 are actually signed and dated by Rembrandt. Nine of these 16 are landscapes.

[9] E.g., +C. J. Holmes+, "The Development of Rembrandt as an Etcher," _Burlington Magazine_ (August 1906), vol. 9, no. 41, p. 313. The well-known story of his having drawn "Six's Bridge" (Hind 209) on the plate while the servant went for the mustard is also often cited (e.g., +Hind+, op. cit., p. 95), but if true appears to be atypical.

[10] +Otto Benesch+, _The Drawings of Rembrandt_, 6 vol., London, 1954-57.

[11] Benesch no. 1225, Groningen (Netherlands) Museum, inv. no. 210, dated about 1650, the wash added by another hand. This drawing was formerly in the personal collection of Cornelis Hofstede de Groot and was first reproduced and discussed by Otto Hirschmann in "Die Handzeichnungen-Sammlung Dr. Hofstede de Groot im Haag, II," _Der Cicerone_ (Leipzig, January 1917), vol. 9, no. 1/2, pp. 21-22.

[12] Benesch 850, _A Clump of Trees_, The Hermitage, Leningrad, about 1648-50, and Benesch 1246, _Farm Building Among Trees_, Albertina, Vienna, inv. no. 8873, Hofstede de Groot 1497 (_Die Handzeichnungen Rembrandts_ ..., Haarlem, 1906), about 1650-51.

[13] Benesch 1236, _Farmstead with a Hay Barn_, Copenhagen, about 1650.

[14] Benesch 1226, _Farm Buildings Beside a Road with Distant Farmstead_, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, Hofstede de Groot 1138, about 1650, with later additions. Ludwig Muenz (_Rembrandt's Etchings_, 2 vols., London, 1952, no. 159, vol. 2, p. 84) cites two drawings, one in the Ashmolean, one in the University Gallery, Oxford. Since the two museums are now one and the same, Muenz appears to have confused two listings of the same drawing. Mr. Hugh Macandrew of the Ashmolean Museum has very kindly confirmed, in a letter to the author, that in their collection there is only the one drawing which is similar to this print. There is yet another drawing, _Farm with Hay Barn_, in the Bonnat collection at the Louvre, Paris, Hofstede de Groot 764, which is cited by Hind as a study sketch. Though very similar to this print, in reverse, it is considered a school piece by both Lugt and Benesch. It is quite possible that one of Rembrandt's pupils accompanied him on his walks and sketched many of the same subjects as the master. The drawing reproduced in +Lugt+, _Mit Rembrandt_ ..., op. cit., fig. 87, is also not by Rembrandt.

[15] Joachim von Sandrart, a former pupil of Rembrandt, writing in 1675, quoted in +Hofstede de Groot+, _Die ... Urkunden_, op. cit., no. 329, p. 392.

[16] The plate for the print under discussion here is not known to have survived. There are, however, still some 79 Rembrandt plates whose present locations are known. Of these, 75 are in the collection of Robert Lee Humber, on deposit at the North Carolina Museum of Art, Raleigh, North Carolina. These are discussed at some length by Andre Charles Coppier (_Les eaux-fortes de Rembrandt_, Paris, 1922, pp. 94-96). He gives the chemical content of the plate for the _Presentation in the Temple_ (Hind 162, about 1640), as 95% copper with impurities of tin, lead, zinc, arsenic, and silver. This may presumably be taken as typical. +Muenz+, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 47, gives a listing of the surviving plates, but mistakenly presumes the Humber plates to be in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. As a matter of interest, the plate of the print, _The Gold-Weigher_ (Hind 167), said by Muenz to be in the Rosenwald collection, Philadelphia, is not and never has been in that collection. It is completely unknown to Mr. Lessing J. Rosenwald and his curator. Its present whereabouts is unknown to the author.

[17] _The Whole Art of Drawing, Painting, Limning, and Etching. Collected out of the Choicest Italian and German Authors.... Originally invented and written by the famous Italian Painter Odoardo Fialetti, Painter of Boloign. Published for the Benefit of all ingenuous Gentlemen and Artists by Alexander Brown Practitioner. London, Printed for Peter Stint at the Signe of the White Horse in Giltspurre Street, and Simon Miller at the Starre in St. Paul's Churchyard, MDCLX._ Page 33. London, 1660. Quoted by +Muenz+, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 208, who first discovered the reference. Since Fialetti died in 1638, the reference to Rembrandt's ground is likely to be by Brown or an anonymous contemporary editor.

[18] +Abraham Bosse+, _Traicte des manieres de graver en taille douce_ ..., Paris, 1645, p. 41. Bosse's soft-ground formula, for comparison's sake, is three parts wax, two parts mastic, and one part asphaltum, which is very close to the cited Rembrandt ground.

[19] Numerous similar grounds are given in +E. S. Lumsden+, _The Art of Etching_ (London: Seeley Service and Co., 1924); reprint (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1962), pp. 35-38.

[20] Loc. cit. (footnote 17).

[21] Some etchers, however, prefer this effect. Cf. +Lumsden+, op. cit., p. 42.

[22] +Muenz+, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 13, quotes this letter without giving the source. Evidently this is the first written reference to white ground.

[23] Op. cit., pp. 46-48. Knowledge of the process seems to have disappeared completely during the 18th and 19th centuries. Hubert Herkomer, writing in 1892, believed that he had invented the white ground for the first time (_Etching and Mezzotint Engraving_, London, 1892, pp. 4 and 25).

[24] The etching is Hind 42. The drawing (Benesch 21, Hofstede de Groot 893) is in the British Museum. The black chalk has been confirmed (see footnote 25). It is also clear that the backing is not graphite, which would, of course, show up on a black ground as well as a white one.

[25] The etching is Hind 187. The drawing (Benesch 758, Hofstede de Groot 896) is in the British Museum. Some scholarly misinformation has unfortunately been passed on for years. +Muenz+, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 65, cites Jan Six ("Rembrandt's Vorbereiding ...," _Onze Kunst_, 1908, II, p. 53), who in turn cites the personal observation of A. M. Hind of the British Museum, to the effect that this drawing of Anslo was backed with black chalk. The two drawings had apparently not been lifted from their mounts in something like sixty years. In answer to the author's inquiry, Mr. J. K. Rowlands, Assistant Keeper, Department of Prints and Drawings, the British Museum, very kindly wrote: "I can now tell you about the backs of H. 42 and H. 187 [that is, the drawings for these two prints], which have now been lifted. The reverse of _The Woman Bathing_ [_Diana at the Bath_] has the remains of black unrefined chalk upon it and the portrait of Anslo is backed with Ochre tempera. I think this news will interest you." I am most grateful to Mr. Rowlands and his staff for their trouble and kindness.

[26] An excellent example of this type of line is seen in the horizon lines on the left, which in this case were added only after several proofs had been pulled from the plate. The addition of these lines constitutes the difference between the recorded first and second states of this print.

[27] The documents on this story were first published by Bredius in 1909 ("Rembrandt als Plaatsnijder," _Oud-Holland_, v. 27, pp. 112 f.) and have been frequently cited since then. The print is the portrait of Jan Antonides van der Linden (Hind 268).

[28] Confusion has arisen over a note, clearly in Rembrandt's hand, on one of his drawings (Benesch 1351, Hofstede de Groot 763, dated about 1654-55). The Dutch text is given in +Benesch+, op. cit., vol. 6, p. 374. It reads, "In order to etch ...," and gives a recipe consisting of turpentine and turpentine oil. This, of course, could not possibly be a mordant. Muenz discusses it (op. cit., vol. 2, p. 14) and concludes that with the addition of mastic, this could be a kind of stop-out varnish. We are not likely to come closer to an answer for this cryptic inscription.

[29] +Coppier+, op. cit.

[30] _Ibid._, p. 117. Detail of plate for Hind 277, dated 1654.

[31] +Bosse+, op. cit., pp. 5 and 11. Vitriol is copper or iron sulfate, saltpeter is potassium nitrate, and alum is an aluminum sulfate salt. Bosse's other two acids are distilled pure vinegar (acetic acid) and a boiled mixture of vinegar and chloride salts. Both are relatively weak. My thanks to Dr. Robert P. Multhauf for his advice on 17th-century chemistry.

[32] +Felix Brunner+ (_A Handbook of Graphic Reproduction Processes_, New York: Hastings House, 1962, p. 124), suggests that Rembrandt may have used ferric chloride, a weaker mordant, around 1640.

[33] +Rosenberg+, _Rembrandt: Life and Work_ (London: Phaidon Press, rev. ed., 1964), p. 330.

[34] My gratitude to Jacob Kainen for first pointing out the existence of these disembodied spirits.

[35] Arnold Houbraken, quoted in +Hofstede de Groot+, _Die Urkunden_ ..., op. cit., no. 407, p. 471.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1966

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D. C. 20402 Price 20 cents