Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Attributed to Gerrit Dou(Leiden 1613 – 1675 Leiden)

ca. 1628–29
oil on panel
66.6 x 50.9 cm
GD-112© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 2 of 17

How to cite
Surh, Dominique. “Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 3rd ed. Edited by Arthur K.
Wheelock Jr. and Lara Yeager-Crasselt. New York, 2020–23. https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/ (archived
December 2023).
A PDF of every version of this entry is available in this Online Catalogue's Archive, and the Archive is managed by apermanent URL. New versions are added only when a substantive change to the narrative occurs.

In the quiet of his atelier, a young artist gazes out at the viewer while seated before a

Comparative Figureslarge, stretched canvas on a wooden easel, his right arm raised as though he is about
to apply paint to his composition. The horizontal shape and substantial scale of thecanvas indicate that the young artist is composing a history scene, the most difficultand prestigious in the hierarchy of painting genres. At the same time, his direct gazesuggests that his scene incorporates some aspect of the real world, one that implicitly
involves us.
The studio scene offers a fascinating glimpse into an artist’s workshop. One sees herethat Dutch artists sat when they painted, and the way they stretched their canvases on
a wooden frame. The young artist has also brought to his studio a number of props

Fig 1. Workshop of Rembrandt van
Rijn, possibly Gerrit Dou and Govaert
Flinck, Parable of the Hidden
Treasure, ca. 1630, Szépmüsézeti
Múzeum, Budapest, inv. 342

appropriate for a history painting. Some of these are in a large chest filled with costly
vessels of silver and gold, exotic fabrics, and a heavy chain with a medallion, while on
the floor are a cuirass, plumed helmet or cabasset, and various patterned
textiles.[1] The large tome and horn are attributes associated with the muse of history,
Cleo. Also in the studio are wooden stretchers of different shapes leaning against theback wall. The grisaille tronies of an old man and woman tacked to the wall are thetypes of character studies artists often painted in Leiden during the late 1620s andearly 1630s.
This intriguing work, which is unsigned and undated, is characteristic of paintings
created in Leiden around 1630, but much debate has surrounded its attribution. It wasonce thought to have been executed by Rembrandt van Rijn (1606–69), but thattraditional assessment was challenged in 1911 when Wilhelm Martin gave thepainting to Rembrandt’s pupil, Gerrit Dou. Martin dated it to the period of Dou’s

Fig 2. Attributed to Gerrit Dou, An
Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard withan Arms Still Life, ca. 1630–35, oil on
panel, 66 x 51 cm, Szépmüsézeti
Múzeum, Budapest, inv. 62.10© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 3 of 17

apprenticeship with Rembrandt from 1628 to 1631.[2] Subsequently, Kurt Bauchproposed that Rembrandt retouched the work in critical areas, specifically the face of
the artist.[3] Werner Sumowski, who initially accepted Bauch’s proposal, eventuallyconcluded that Dou made the various compositional adjustments himself.[4]An attribution of the painting to Dou, however, convinced neither Richard Hunnewell
nor Ronni Baer. In 1983 Hunnewell suggested an alternative attribution to
Rembrandt’s close circle, or possibly, Willem de Poorter (1608–48),[5] while Baer, in
1990, characterized the still-life elements in the painting as “superficially Dou-like”
but noted that their “formulaic highlights and . . . rough, broad handling . . . find noparallel in Dou’s autograph work.”[6] Baer suggested that the painting was executed by
the same unidentified hand or hands as Parable of the Hidden Treasure in the
Szépművészeti Múzeum in Budapest (fig 1).[7] She also noted that the painting isclosely related to The Rest on the Flight into Egypt formerly in Downton Castle. BothFig 3. Attributed to Gerrit Dou, Artist
at His Easel, ca. 1630–32, oil on panel,
59 x 43.5 cm, Private Collection,
United Kingdom

paintings have been considered collaborative works in which Dou participated, but
their attributions are uncertain.[8]In an unpublished essay from 2003, Bob van den Boogert defended the attribution of
the painting to Dou. He argued that the painting is closely associated in style andcompositional organization with a painting in Budapest: An Officer of the Leiden
Civic Guard with an Arms Still Life (fig 2).[9] Although the Budapest painting is
unsigned and undated and the attribution is debated, Van den Boogert believed thatthe young Dou executed both paintings. Both panels have the same dimensions,
include comparable still-life elements, and share a similar layering of objects thatcreates a consistent approach to spatial recession. A recent examination of the two

Fig 4. Rembrandt van Rijn, Artist in
His Studio, ca. 1628–29, 24.8 x 31.7
cm, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,
38.1838, Photograph ©2017 Museumof Fine Arts, Boston

works side by side revealed striking similarities in palette and compositional
approach, increasing the likelihood that the same artist executed both
works.[10] Whether or not that artist is Dou, however, is another question.
The ongoing discussions regarding the attribution of this painting to Dou relate tolarger unresolved questions about the character of Dou’s early paintings. Very little is
known about Dou’s apprenticeship with Rembrandt, and experts do not agree on thepaintings he produced during this time.[11] The problem of defining the nature ofDou’s early style is exacerbated by the fact that there are no dated paintings by Dou
before 1637.
One of the central issues in assessing Dou’s early works is the nature of his painting
technique. Baer, for example, believes that the young master painted in a relatively
smooth style, as is evident in Artist at His Easel (fig 3).[12] Jørgen Wadum, on theother hand, believes that from the beginning of his career, even before he enteredFig 5. Gerrit Dou, Self-Portrait, ca.
1645–46, oil on panel, 12.4 x 8.3 cm,
Aetas Aurea Holding SA

Rembrandt’s workshop, Dou executed his works with fine, parallel hatchings.[13] Ernst
van de Wetering has discussed the didactic importance of imitation in studio practice© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 4 of 17

and argues that it is to be expected that Dou’s early painting style would closely
resemble Rembrandt’s own.[14] The question then remains as to whether the characterof Dou’s early brushwork is identifiable as a consistent, idiosyncratic feature, orwhether Dou expanded his technique and experimented with brushwork during theseyears in Rembrandt’s studio. The application of paint in the Leiden Collection
painting is relatively loose and thick, but until a clearer resolution of these divergent
views of Dou’s early manner of painting is achieved, it seems appropriate to designate
this work as “attributed to Gerrit Dou.”
Even though no firm attribution of this work can be made at the present time, thepictorial influences that shaped the subject matter and composition of the Leiden
Collection painting are readily evident and point to an origin within Rembrandt’s
close circle in Leiden. The cuirass and plumed helmet, for example, are similar toobjects in the military still life in the foreground of Rembrandt’s History Painting of1626 in the Lakenhal.[15] The oval grisaille sketches on the back wall of the studiorecall tronies and turbaned figures in drawings and prints by Rembrandt and his
fellow Leiden artist, Jan Lievens (1607–74).[16] The most striking pictorial source forthe Leiden Collection painting, however, is Rembrandt’s Artist in His Studio, ca.
1628–29, in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (fig 4).[17] Like Rembrandt’s work, thecomposition is organized around a large painting on an easel turned away from theviewer, with a doorway on the right and a light source on the left. Similar, as well, arethe rustic wooden floorboards, crumbling plaster and orthogonally oblique wall in the
middle of the room, which leave little doubt that the Boston painting served as thispainting’s direct prototype.
The identity of the artist sitting before the easel has been frequently discussed, withscholars variously identifying the figure as either Rembrandt or Dou.[18] Martin firstcited the figure as an anonymous, generic artist, but later identified it as a portrait ofDou.[19] Indeed, the artist’s features—rounded cheeks, a mouth with a full upper lip at
the center, cleft chin, and slightly upturned nose—are remarkably similar to Dou’s
Self-Portrait from ca. 1635 in the Cheltenham Art Gallery or another self-portraitfrom 1645 in the Kremer Collection (fig 5). Dou would have been around seventeen
years old in 1630, when the Leiden Collection painting was executed, which seems
consistent with the age of the man in this work.
The dating of the painting to ca. 1630 is also supported by dendrochronological data,
which indicates that the wood panel was ready for priming by the middle of the1620s.[20] The analysis provides further evidence that the painting was executed
within Rembrandt’s close circle: the panel comes from the same tree as Rembrandt’s
Head of an Old Man in a Cap from ca. 1630, now in the Bader Collection.[21] This
match suggests that the two wooden supports were obtained from the same panel© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 5 of 17

maker in Leiden, possibly acquired as part of a mutual workshop consignment.[22]Based on the aforementioned evidence, it seems most reasonable to conclude that thepresent painting originated within Rembrandt’s immediate circle in Leiden, most
likely by Gerrit Dou, although there were undoubtedly other artists in Leiden whosenames have not been recorded who worked in a similar style. Also supporting thenotion of Dou’s authorship is the characterization of the artist as a pictor doctus
surrounded by the objects of his profession. Here, the young but erudite painterpresents himself as a skilled and ambitious artist, which is consistent with thepresentation of Dou’s artistic persona in his later self-portraiture.[23] Although thecomplexities surrounding Dou’s early artistic personality are such that a firm
attribution of this work to the young master cannot yet be made, ongoing research
about the artist’s early career may eventually determine that this painting holds animportant place within his artistic evolution.

- Dominique Surh, 2017

© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 6 of 17

Endnotes
1. Together, these objects have been interpreted as a vanitas still life and as an illustration of the
Hippocratic aphorism, “Ars longa, vita brevis” (“art endures but life is brief”). See J. Richard Judson,“Artist in His Studio,” in Rembrandt after Three Hundred Years (Exh. cat. The Art Institute of Chicago;
The Minneapolis Institute of Arts; The Detroit Institute of Arts) (Chicago, 1969), 51–52, no. 36. The
grouping of valuable objects and military attributes has also been explained, albeit less convincingly, asa reference to the conflict that is caused by the possession of gold. See Hans-Joachim Raupp,
Untersuchungen zu Künstlerbildnis und Künsterdarstellung in den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert(Hildesheim, 1984), 170.
2. During the nineteenth century the painting was attributed to Rembrandt and was considered a selfportrait. See Joseph H. Carter, Catalogue of the High Legh Collection [ca. 1893], 52, no. 28. Martin
would have seen the painting in 1911, when it appeared with Kleinberger Galleries in Paris, prompting
his decision to include it as an autograph work by Dou in the French edition of his monograph on theartist published that year. See Wilhelm Martin, Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre: Etude sur la peinture
hollandaise et les marchaunds au dix septième siècle (Paris, 1911), 173, no. 63. Hofstede de Groot also
considered Artist at His Easel to be by Dou, even though his volume on Dou went to press before thepainting came on the market, see Hofstede de Groot’s archival files at the RKD-Nederlands Instituutvoor Kunstgeschiedenis, where GD-112 is listed under “Dou: Bekende Mannen,” which reproduces the
text copied from the 1893 High Legh Collection catalogue, and includes the note: “Is een bekende GerardDou.”
3. Kurt Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit: Studien zur geschichtlichen Bedeutung seines
Frühstils (Berlin, 1960), 221–23; Kurt Bauch, Rembrandt: Gemälde (Berlin, 1966), 29, A7. Kurt Bauchargued that the pentimenti along the figure’s face and back were indications of workshop corrections
made by Rembrandt. He maintained that the confident modeling of the sitter’s face was by the same
hand as the Laughing Self Portrait in the Rijksmuseum, then attributed to Rembrandt, and therefore
concluded that Rembrandt had executed this part of the painting. On the numerous changes made during
the painting phase, see the technical report by Joanna Dunn, on file, the Leiden Collection, New York.
Several changes were made during the process of painting, which are visible to the naked eye in theupper layers of paint. These include the adjustments made along the seated figure’s back and face(originally higher in the picture plane closer to the level of his lips, and along the right side of the trunk
where a curved silhouette was replaced by a rectangular edge. Other indistinct forms at the center left,
located near the representations of the canvas stretchers leaning against the back wall are more readily
visible through the X-radiograph, showing various silhouettes near the back wall that were later covered
over with paint by the artist, indicating that the composition was modified in the background during thepainting process.
4. Werner Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler, 6 vols. (Landau and Pfalz, 1983–94), 1: 528, no.
© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 7 of 17261. On the interpretation of the changes as retouchings made by Rembrandt, Bauch compared the faceof the New York painting to the Rijksmuseum’s Laughing Self-Portrait and argued that there is a strong
similarity between the works, leading him to suggest that the face in the Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel was
painted by Rembrandt. However, the attribution of Laughing Self Portrait was rejected from
Rembrandt’s oeuvre in 1982, when Lievens’s name was first proposed as its possible author. See Josua
Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1, 1625–1631, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt
Research Project (The Hague, 1982), 629–33, C34; Josua Bruyn et al. A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings,
vol. 4: Self-Portraits, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, (The Hague, 2005), 4: 166–67.
On Bauch’s comparison of the Leiden Collection painting with the Rijkmuseum’s so-called Laughing
Self-Portrait, see Kurt Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit: Studien zur geschichtlichen Bedeutungseines Frühstils (Berlin, 1960), 221–23; Eduard Plietzsch, Holländische und flämische Maler des 17.
Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1960), 37–38; Werner Sumowski, “Rezension von: K. Bauch, Der frühe
Rembrandt und seine Zeit (1960),” Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 3–4 (1962): 209; and Horst Vey, Die
Sammlung Henle: aus dem grosen Jahrhundert der neiderländischen Malerei (Cologne, 1964), no. 10.
5. Hunnewell discussed the present work along with a group of seven unsigned, and four spuriously signed
paintings from the early 1630s representing the theme of the artist in his studio that Martin or Van Hall
had attributed to Dou. Because the group of paintings dates from a period during which Dou’sdevelopment remains unclear, Hunnewell chose to categorize them simply as an iconographic groupneeding further examination. Richard W. Hunnewell, “Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of theArtist,” 2 vols. (PhD diss. Boston University, 1983), Appendix C (Listing of Rejected Self Portraits andProblematic Works), 288, 291–92, no. 13.
6. I am grateful to Ronni Baer for sharing her reasons for doubting the painting’s attribution to Dou during
an examination in front of the painting in New York on 6 December 2013. Among other aspects
discussed, Baer does not find the handling of the pages of the manuscript in the foreground, themodeling of the face, or the loose brushwork of the grisaille sketches to be consistent with other works
securely attributed to the artist. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (PhD
diss. New York University, 1990), Catalogue C (Works of Rejected Attribution), 23, no. C 1.
7. I am grateful to Ildikó Ember, who has shared the result of Peter Klein’s dendrochronological analysis of
the Parable of the Hidden Treasure, which consists of three boards in which the youngest tree ring wasformed in 1616, 1602, and 1617, making its possible creation plausible after 1636. On the Parable ofthe Hidden Treasure, see Agnes Czobor, Rembrandt and His Circle in Hungarian Collections (Budapest,1969), plates 9–10.
8. For a discussion of the 1669 inventory that mentions Rest on the Flight attributed to Dou and Flinck, seeRonni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (PhD diss., New York University,1990), 20–24. The painting, formerly in Downton Castle, was initially regarded by the Rembrandt
Research Project as originating from the later 1630s in Haarlem. Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of
Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1: 1625–1631, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The
Hague, 1982), 486, under C6; on the Rest on the Flight into Egypt, see Stichting Foundation Rembrandt© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 8 of 17

Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. 5 vols. Edited by Josua Bruyn et al. (vols. 1–3) andErnst van de Wetering (vols. 4–5) (Dordrecht, 1982–2011), 1: 483–87, C6; 2: 848–53; 5: 312, as byGerard Dou and Govaert Flinck. For a more recent discussion of Parable of the Hidden Treasure that
follows the attribution to Dou and Flinck, see Christiaan Vogelaar, “The Parable of the Hidden
Treasure,” in Rembrandt and the Dutch Golden Age (Exh. cat. Budapest, Szépmüsézeti Múzeum)(Budapest, 2014), no. 89, 342–43.
9. For the unpublished essay from 2003 on the present painting, see Bob C. van den Boogert, “Gerrit Dou(Leiden 1613–1675), Self-Portrait of the Artist in His Studio,” courtesy of Jack Kilgore, copy kept on
file, The Leiden Collection, New York. Regarding the painting in the Szépmüsézeti Múzeum in
Budapest as a work by Dou, see in Agnes Czobor, Rembrandt and His Circle in Hungarian Collections(Budapest, 1969), pls. 18–19. Ronni Baer considers this painting a work of uncertain attribution and has
reserved final judgment on its attribution to be determined upon firsthand examination. Ronni Baer,“The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (PhD diss., New York University, 1990), Catalogue
B (Works of Questionable Attribution), no. B1. See also Bob C. van den Boogert, “Gerard Dou (Leiden
1613–1675) (?), An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard with an Arms Still Life, ca. 1630/35,” in The
Mystery of the Young Rembrandt, ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst van de Wetering (Exh. cat.
Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; Amsterdam, Museum Het
Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001) 336–39, no. 68.
10. I would like to thank Ildikó Ember and Júlia Tátrai for receiving GD-112 on loan at the Szépmüsézeti
Múzeum in the fall of 2014, and to Gerdien Verschoor for arranging a discussion and examination
session of the painting next to An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard with an Arms Still Life (inv. 62.10)
on the occasion of a CODART Focus Study Day devoted to “Rembrandt and the Dutch Golden Age”
from 26–27 October 2014. Based on this firsthand examination, I concluded that the two works could
both be by the same hand, despite some differences in the paint handling, especially in the faces of the
figures. In the case of the Budapest work, the possibility of overpainting around the face could accountfor the differences in paint handling between this area and the rest of the painting. Forthcoming
technical investigation of the Budapest painting may lead to additional insight, particularly as it relates tothe present work.
11. In the first major museum show devoted to Dou in 2000, a number of paintings attributed to Dou’s early
period were presented, many of which had been attributed to the artist since the time of Martin andendorsed, more recently, by either Baer or Sumowski. Baer’s inclusion in the exhibition of a number ofthese early, unsigned paintings to Dou has received some criticism from experts in the field. Ernst van
de Wetering argued that “during the recent Dou exhibition . . . the work of mediocre Dou disciples waspresented as early work of Dou himself.” Similarly, in a discussion about Dou’s painting technique,Jørgen Wadum states: “We feel that in this exhibition weak imitations were presented as early works byDou.” The complexity of the situation is evident in Van den Boogert’s assertion that the attribution of
the present painting to Dou only makes sense if other attributed works are removed from Dou’s earlyoeuvre. The four paintings that Van den Boogert argues should not be considered autograph are: Artist at© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 9 of 17

His Easel, ca. 1630–32 (fig. 3); Man Writing at an Easel, ca. 1631–32, oil on panel, 31.5 x 25 cm,
formerly in the Ivor Collection, New York; Old Man Lighting a Pipe, ca. 1635, oil on panel, 49 x 61.5
cm, formerly in a private collection, England; and Old Woman Peeling Apples, ca. 1629–31, Staatliches
Museen, Berlin. The first three of these paintings were included in Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675:
Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat, Washington D.C.,
National Gallery of Art; London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; The Hague, Mauritshuis) (Zwolle, 2000),
nos. 1, 3, 5. Cf. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., New York
University, 1990), 9–33; Ernst van de Wetering, “Delimiting Rembrandt’s Autograph Oeuvre—An
Insoluble Problem?” in The Mystery of the Young Rembrandt, ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst
van de Wetering (Exh. cat. Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; Amsterdam,
Museum Het Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001), 63; Jørgen Wadum, “Dou Doesn’t Paint, Oh No,
He Juggles with His Brush: Gerrit Dou, a Rembrandtesque Fijnschilder,” Art Matters: Netherlands
Technical Studies in Art 1 (2002): 72; Bob C. van den Boogert, “Gerrit Dou (Leiden 1613–1675), SelfPortrait of the Artist in his Studio,” courtesy of Jack Kilgore, 2003, copy kept on file, The Leiden
Collection, New York.
12. Baer considers the paintings’ smooth handling and palette of cooler tonalities in aubergine, violet, andblue, as well as the recurring motifs of the book, globe, and inkstand, to be characteristic of Dou’s stylearound 1630–32. Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master Painter in the Age of Rembrandt, ed.
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art; London, Dulwich Picture
Gallery; The Hague, Mauritshuis) (Zwolle, 2000), no. 1, 64–65; see also Ronni Baer, “The Paintings ofGerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (PhD diss, New York University, 1990), no. 6.
13. Jørgen Wadum, “Dou Doesn’t Paint, Oh No, He Juggles with His Brush: Gerrit Dou, a RembrandtesqueFijnschilder,” Art Matters: Netherlands Technical Studies in Art 1 (2002): 62–77, esp. 73. On Dou’s
formative training, prior to his apprenticeship with Rembrandt, with the engraver Bartholomeus
Dolendo and the glass-painter Pieter Couwenhorn, see Piet Bakker’s biography on Dou in the present
catalogue.
14. After leaving Rembrandt’s studio in 1631, Dou began to work independently and presumably began tohave pupils of his own, whose imitations, in turn, would closely resemble his own style. Thus, it ispossible that some signed and unsigned paintings from the early 1630s were executed by Dou’s own
pupils or early imitators. See Ernst van de Wetering “Delimiting Rembrandt’s Autograph Oeuvre—An
Insoluble Problem?” in The Mystery of the Young Rembrandt, ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst
van de Wetering (Exh. cat. Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; Amsterdam,
Museum Het Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001) 58–67.
15. Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1: 1625–1631 Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1982), 104–13, A 6; Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus
of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 4: Self-Portraits, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project(Dordrecht, 2005), 65, 178 (figs. 139 and 140), 179, 184; Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of
Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 5: Small-Scale History Paintings, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 10 of 17

Project (Dordrecht, 2011), 4, 7 (fig. 5), 57 (fig. 63), 105, 150, 151 (fig. 10), 191, 212.
16. The sketch on the right relates to Rembrandt’s Bust of an Old Man with a Turban, ca. 1627, signed, oilin panel, 26.5 x 20 cm., Collection Fondation Aetas Aurea; see Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of
Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 4: Self-Portraits, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project(Dordrecht, 2005), 635–66. This relates to a previously unrecorded drawing that recently appeared on
the market and is only one of a small number of drawings by Dou that survive. See Sotheby’s, London, 9July 2014, lot 107: Gerrit Dou, A ‘Tronie’ of an Oriental Gentleman, black chalk on vellum, signed
GDOU (GD in monogram), 154 x 122 mm. On the fascination with Middle Eastern costume in
Rembrandt’s work, see Walter Liedtke, “Man in Oriental Costume,” in Dutch Paintings in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2 vols. (New York, 2007), 2: 554–67, no. 142. The female figure in profile
also relates to Jan Lievens’s Old Woman in Half-Length Profile, Facing Left, in the Maida and George
Abrams Collection in Boston, from ca. 1628–30; see Gregory Rubenstein, “Old Woman in Half-Length
Profile, Facing Left,” in Jan Lievens: A Dutch Master Rediscovered, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh.
cat. Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art; Amsterdam, Museum Het Rembrandthuis; Milwaukee,
Milwaukee Art Museum) (New Haven, 2008), 234, no. 96.
17. For an overview of the painting, see Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1:
1625–1631, ed. Josua Bruyn et al. (The Hague, 1982), 208–13, A18.
18. Various scholars regarded the painting as a portrait of Rembrandt, an assertion that was first put forward
in 1893 when the painting was thought to be by Rembrandt, see Joseph H. Carter, Catalogue of the High
Legh Collection [ca. 1893], 52, no. 28; Kleinberger Galleries, A Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue of
150 Paintings by Old Masters of the Dutch, Flemish, German, Italian, Spanish and French Schools fromthe Kleinberger Galleries (Paris, 1911), no. 16; Leo Balet,“Die Sammlung Bachstitz,” Der Cicerone 13(1921): 336–38; Horst Vey, Die Sammlung Henle As dem grosen Jahrhundert der neiderländischen
Malerei (Cologne, 1964), no. 10.
19. Martin identified the sitter in Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel as a generic painter in 1911, but he described
it in 1913 as a self-portrait of Dou. See Wilhelm Martin, Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre: Etude sur lapeinture hollandaise et les marchaunds au dix septième siècle (Paris, 1911), 173, no. 63; cf. Wilhelm
Martin, Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde, Klassiker der Kunst in Gesamtausgaben 24 (Stuttgart, 1913),
180, no. 13. More recently, the subject matter has been identified as a portrait of Dou in an unpublishedessay from 2003 by Bob van den Boogert, “Gerrit Dou (Leiden 1613–1675), Self-Portrait of the Artist in
His Studio,” courtesy of Jack Kilgore, copy kept on file, the Leiden Collection, New York.
20. Peter Klein indicates that the youngest year ring was formed in one of two boards in the year 1613 (withthe earliest possible felling dates as 1622/28/49) with production possible from 1627 to 1637. See Peter
Klein, “Report on the Dendrochronological Analysis of the Panel ‘The Artist in the Studio’ (G. Dou),”
dated 2009, unpublished report, kept on file, The Leiden Collection. A second dendrochronologist, Ian
Tyers, was engaged to provide an additional analysis, which yielded some contradictory information.
Tyers states that the youngest year ring of GD-112, in 2 of 3 boards, was formed in 1609 (with theearliest possible felling date 1618/24/45) with production possible from 1622 to 1633. See Ian Tyers,© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 11 of 17“GD-112 Gerrit Dou, An Artist in His Studio,” dated November 2010, unpublished report, kept on file,
The Leiden Collection.
21. The connection between the two panels is made by Peter Klein. Although once doubted by theRembrandt Research Project, Head of an Old Man in a Cap is now widely considered to be an
undisputed work by Rembrandt. Strong evidence for this is the print made after the painting by Jan
Gillisz. van Vliet. See David De Witt, The Bader Collection: Dutch and Flemish Paintings (Kingston,2008) no. 161, 261–65; Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1: 1625–1631,
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1982), 1, C22, 16, 43–44, 576–80. I
would like to thank David De Witt for sharing Peter Klein’s unpublished dendrochronological report on
the painting, which states that the youngest year ring of the panel was formed in 1613, making aplausible creation date for the work ca. 1630.
22. For a discussion of the Leiden production of wood, panel makers and relevant bibliography, see
Dominique Surh, Ilona van Tuinen, and John Twilley, “Insights from Technical Analysis on a Group of
Paintings by Gerrit Dou in the Leiden Collection,” JHNA Art 6, no. 1 (Winter 2014):
DOI:10.5092/jhna.2014.6.1.3.
23. Richard W. Hunnewell, “Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of the Artist,” 2 vols. (PhD diss.
Boston University, 1983), 1: 24–84. Walter Liedtke, “Self-Portrait,” in Dutch Paintings in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2 vols. (New York, 2007) 1: 158–66, no. 27.

ProvenancePossibly Count Joseph von Rechberg (1769–1833), Austria.
George Cornwall Legh, M.P. (1804–77), East Hall, High Legh, Knustford, Cheshire; by descent to his
nephew, Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Martin Cornwall Legh (1839–1904).
Lindo S. Myers, London.
[Kleinberger Galeries, Paris, by 1911.]
Friedrich Lundwig von Gans (1833–1920), Frankfurt-am-Main, by 1913.
[Kunsthandel K.W. Bachstitz, The Hague, by 1920].
Karl Anton Theodor Henschel (1873–1924), Kassel, ca. 1924.
[Antiquitäten Gustav Cramer, Berlin, 1938 (to K. Erasmus Aerdenhout)].
Erasmus Aerdenhout, 1938 (sale, Christie’s, London, 24 February 1939, no. 37, as a self-portrait byRembrandt [to Watson for £546]).
Collection Philippens, Amsterdam, ca. 1939–40.
[Schaeffer Galleries, New York, by 1948].
[F.H. Enneking, Amsterdam, by 1958 (to G. Cramer Oude Kunst)].
© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 12 of 17[G. Cramer Oude Kunst, The Hague, 1958.]
Heinz Kisters (1912–77), Kreuzlingen (to Günther and Anne Liese Henle).
Günther and Anne Liese Henle, Duisburg, 1959 (their sale among others, Sotheby’s, London, 3
December 1997, no. 6, as by Gerrit Dou, unsold; sale, Christie’s, London, 10 July 2002, no. 70, as byGerrit Dou [to Jack Kilgore]).
[Jack Kilgore & Co., Inc., New York, 2002; Otto Naumann Ltd., New York, 2004].
From whom acquired by the present owner in 2004.

Exhibition History
Delft, Prinsenhof Museum, “Xe Oude Kunst- en Antiekbeurs,” 21 August–9 September 1958 [lent by
F.H. Enneking].
Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, “Die Sammlung Henle. Aus dem grossen Jahrhundert derniederländischen Malerei,” 22 February–5 April 1964, no. 10 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle].
Chicago, Art Institute of Chicago, “Rembrandt after Three Hundred Years,” 25 October–7 December
1969; Minneapolis, Minneapolis Institute of Arts, 22 December 1969–1 February 1970; Detroit, Detroit
Institute of Arts, 24 February 1970–5 April 1970, no. 36 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle].
The Hague, Mauritshuis, “Terugzien in bewondering / A Collector’s Choice,” February–March 1982, no.
30 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle].
Amsterdam, K. & V. Waterman Gallery, “The Impact of a Genius. Rembrandt, his Pupils and Followers
in the Seventeenth Century,” 22 April–17 May 1983; Groningen, Groningen Museum, 20 May–30 June
1983, no. 14 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle].
Norfolk, Va., Chrysler Museum of Art, on loan with the permanent collection, 2005–2006 [lent by thepresent owner].
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum of Art, on loan with the permanent collection, December 2009– January
2011 [lent by the present owner].
Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art, “Dutch Treat: A Glimpse of Holland’s Golden Age,” 11October 2011 – 6 January 2012 [lent by the present owner].
Leiden, Museum de Lakenhal, “Gerrit Dou. The Leiden Collection From New York,” 9 March–31
August 2014 [lent by the present owner].
Budapest, Szépművészeti Museum, on loan with the permanent collection, October–December 2014
[lent by the present owner].
Ithaca, Cornell University, Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art, “An Eye For Detail: Dutch Painting
From The Leiden Collection,” September 2014–May 2015 [lent by the present owner].

© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 13 of 17

Beijing, National Museum of China, “Rembrandt and His Time: Masterpieces from The Leiden
Collection,” 17 June–3 September 2017, no. 25 [lent by the present owner].
Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch Golden Age:
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection,” 23 September 2017–25 February 2018, no. 25 [lent by thepresent owner].
Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer: Masterpiecesof The Leiden Collection,” 28 March 2018–22 July 2018, no. 16 [lent by the present owner].
St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer: Masterpieces of
The Leiden Collection,” 5 September 2018–13 January 2019, no. 16 [lent by the present owner].
Abu Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch Golden Age. Masterpieces fromThe Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre,” 14 February–18 May 2019, no. 44 [lent by thepresent owner].
Amsterdam, Hermitage Amsterdam, “Rembrandt and his Contemporaries: History Paintings from The
Leiden Collection,” 4 February–27 August 2023, no. 1 [lent by the present owner].

References
Carter, Joseph H. Catalogue of the Collection of Paintings at High Legh Hall. [ca. 1893], 52, no. 28, as aself-portrait by Rembrandt van Rijn.
Martin, Wilhelm. “Het leven en de werken van Gerrit Dou.” PhD diss. Leiden University, 1901, no. 63(as by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre. Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et les marchaunds
au dix septième siècle. Paris, 1911, 173, no. 63 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Kleinberger Galleries. A Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue of 150 Paintings by Old Masters of the
Dutch, Flemish, German, Italian, Spanish and French Schools from the Kleinberger Galleries. New York,
1911, no. 16 (as probably a portrait of Rembrandt by Gerrit Dou).
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde in 247 Abbildungen. Klassiker der Kunst in
Gesamtausgaben 24. Stuttgart, 1913, 180, no. 13 (as a self-portrait by Gerrit Dou).
Bachstitz Galerie. The Bachstitz Gallery. The Hague, 1920, 22, no. 29 (as a portrait of Rembrandt byGerrit Dou).
Van Falke, Otto. The Bachstitz Gallery: Catalogue of Paintings and Tapestries. Berlin, 1921, 1: no. 34 (asa portrait of Rembrandt by Gerrit Dou).
Balet, Leo. “Die Sammlung Bachstitz.” Der Cicerone 13 (May 1921): 334 (as a portrait of Rembrandt byGerrit Dou).
Bauch, Kurt. Der frühe Rembrandt und sein Zeit: Studien zur geschichtlichen Bedeutung seines
Frühstils. Berlin, 1960, 221–23 (as a self-portrait by Dou, retouched by Rembrandt van Rijn).
© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 14 of 17

Plietzsch, Eduard. Holländische und Flämische Maler des 17. Jahrhunderts. Leipzig, 1960, 37–38 (as by
Dou, retouched by Rembrandt van Rijn).
Sumowski, Werner. “Rezension von: K. Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit (1960).”
Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 3/4 (1962): 209 (as by Gerrit Dou, retouched by Rembrandt van Rijn).
Van Hall, Hermine. Portretten van nederlandse beeldende kunstenaars/Portraits of Dutch Painters andOther Artists of the Low Countries. Amsterdam, 1963, 81–82, no. 25 (as by Dou, retouched by
Rembrandt van Rijn).
Vey, Horst. Die Sammlung Henle: aus dem grossen Jahrhundert der niederländischen Malerei. Exh. cat.
Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz Museum. Cologne, 1964, no. 10 (as by Dou, possibly retouched by
Rembrandt van Rijn).
Bauch, Kurt. Rembrandt: Gemälde. Berlin, 1966, 29, A7 (as by Gerrit Dou, retouched by Rembrandt van
Rijn).
Judson, J. Richard. “Artist in His Studio.” In Rembrandt After Three Hundred Years: An Exhibition of
Rembrandt and His Followers. Edited by Charles C. Cunningham et al., 51–2, no. 36. Exh. cat. Chicago,
The Art Institute of Chicago; Minneapolis, The Minneapolis Institute of Arts; Detroit, The Detroit
Institute of Arts. Chicago, 1969 (as by Gerrit Dou, possibly retouched by another hand).
Eckardt, Götz . Selbstbildnisse niederländischer Maler des 17. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1971, 176, no. 22 (asby Gerrit Dou).
Van de Watering, Willem L. et al. Terugzien in bewondering: A Collector’s Choice. Exh. cat. The Hague,
Mauritshuis. The Hague, 1982, 98–99, no. 30 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Sumowski, Werner. Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler. Vol. 1, J. A. Backer – A. van Dijck. Landau andPfalz, 1983, 1: 528, 558, no. 261 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Blankert, Albert et al. The Impact of a Genius: Rembrandt, His Pupils and Followers in the SeventeenthCentury: Paintings from Museums and Private Collections. Exh. cat. Amsterdam, Waterman Gallery;
Groningen, Groninger Museum. Amsterdam, 1983, 118–19, no. 14 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Hunnewell, Richard W. “Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of the Artist.” PhD diss. Boston
University, 1983, 2: 288, 291–92, no. 13 (as by circle of Rembrandt van Rijn, possibly Willem dePoorter).
Bruyn, Josua. “Review of Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler, I by W. Sumowski; J. A. Backer; A. van
Dijck.” Oud Holland 98, no. 3 (1984): 161, no. 26 (as an uncertain attribution).
Raupp, Hans-Joachim. Untersuchungen zu Künstlerbildnis und Künsterdarstellung in den Niederlanden im
17. Jahrhundert. 1984, 170 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Bruyn, Josua, et al. A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. Vol. 2, 1631–1634. Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project. The Hague, 1986, 2: 33, no. 14 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Baer, Ronni. “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675).” PhD diss. New York University, 1990, 1: 23,
3: no. C1 (as an uncertain attribution).
Van de Wetering, Ernst. Rembrandt: The Painter at Work. Amsterdam, 1997, 117 (as by Gerrit Dou).
© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 15 of 17

Brown, Christopher, Jan Kelch, and Pieter J.J. van Thiel, eds. Rembrandt: The Master and His
Workshop. Exh. cat. Berlin, Altes Museum; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; London, National Gallery, 1991,
1: 94 (as by Gerrit Dou).
De Winkel, Marieke. Fashion and Fancy: Dress and Meaning in Rembrandt’s Paintings. Amsterdam,
2006, 157, ill.
Kleinert, Katja and Cécile Tainturier. “Schilders uit de verf: Leidse ateliervoorstellingen uit dezeventiende eeuw.” De Zeventiende Eeuw 22 (2006): 114, no. 6, as by Gerrit Dou.
Hirschfelder, Dagmar. “Training Piece and Sales Product. On the Functions of the Tronie in
Rembrandt’s Workshop.” In Rembrandt 2006: Essays. Edited by Michiel Roscam Abbing, 1: 132, no. 9h.
Leiden, 2006 (as attributed to Gerrit Dou).
Surh, Dominique, Ilona van Tuinen, and John Twilley. “Insights from Technical Analysis on a Group of
Paintings by Gerrit Dou in the Leiden Collection.” Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 6:1(Winter 2014): n12, DOI:10.5092/jhna.2014.6.1.3 (as by school of Rembrandt, possibly Gerrit Dou).
Schnackenburg, Bernhard. Jan Lievens: Friend and Rival of the Young Rembrandt. Petersberg, 2016,
131 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel.” In Rembrandt and His Time: Masterpieces fromThe Leiden Collection. Edited by Lara Yeager-Crasselt. Translated by Li Ying, 70; 178, no. 25. Exh. cat.
Beijing, National Museum of China. Beijing, 2017.
Long Museum, West Bund. Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch Golden Age: Masterpieces fromThe Leiden Collection. Exh. cat. Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund. Shanghai, 2017, 94–95.
Bijl, Martin. “Gerrit Dou as a Pupil of Rembrandt.” In Rembrandt and his Circle: Insights andDiscoveries. Edited by Stephanie S. Dickey, 171, 183n9. Amsterdam, 2017 (as by a student or follower
of Dou).
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “The Leiden Collection and the Dutch Golden Age.” In The Age of Rembrandt
and Vermeer: Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina Lyubimova. Translated by Daria
Babich and Daria Kuzina, 17; 28n5. Exh. cat. Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts; St.
Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. Moscow, 2018.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel.” In The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina Lyubimova. Translated by Daria Babich andDaria Kuzina, 98–99; 234, no. 16. Exh. cat. Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts; St.
Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. Moscow, 2018.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “The Leiden Collection and the Dutch Golden Age.” In Rembrandt, Vermeer andthe Dutch Golden Age. Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre. Edited by
Blaise Ducos and Lara Yeager-Crasselt, 28. Exh. cat. Abu Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi. London, 2019.
[Exhibition catalogue also published in French and Arabic.]
Ducos, Blaise, and Lara Yeager-Crasselt, eds. Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch Golden Age.
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre. Exh. cat. Abu Dhabi, Louvre Abu© 2024 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 16 of 17

Dhabi. London, 2019, 114–15, no. 44. [Exhibition catalogue also published in French and Arabic.]
Coutré, Jacquelyn N. “Rembrandus Hermanni Leydensis: Rembrandt, son of Harmen, of Leiden.” In
Leiden circa 1630: Rembrandt Emerges. Edited by Jacquelyn N. Coutré, 28-29, no. 19. Exh. cat.
Kingston, Agnes Etherington; Edmonton, Art Gallery of Alberta; Hamilton, Art Gallery of Hamilton.
Kingston, 2019 (as by Gerrit Dou).
Berry Drago, Elisabeth. Painted Alchemists: Early Modern Artistry and Experiment in the Work ofThomas Wijck. Amsterdam Studies in the Dutch Golden Age. Amsterdam, 2019, 250–51, fig. 6.7.
Schnackenburg, Bernhard. Neues zur Genremalerei des jungen Rembrandt und seines Kreises. WallrafRichartz-Jahrbruch 80. Cologne, 2019, 199, fig. 20; 200, fig. 22.
Wheelock, Arthur K., Jr., Christiaan Vogelaar, and Caroline van Cauwenberge. Rembrandt and His
Contemporaries: History Paintings from The Leiden Collection. Exh. cat. Amsterdam, Hermitage
Amsterdam. Zwolle, 2023, 24–25, no. 1. [Exhibition catalogue also published in Dutch.]

Technical Summary
The painting was executed on a wood panel. The panel is comprised of three vertically grained and oriented
oak boards of unequal size. The left plank is 21 cm wide, the center is 24 cm wide, and the right is only 5.5
cm wide. The left plank could not be dated, but the center and right planks came from the same tree, which
was felled after 1617.[1] There are no original bevels because the panel has been thinned and cradled.
The panel was prepared with a thin, even, light-colored ground. The ground is radio-opaque, accentuating thewood grain in the X-radiographs. The paint was applied in thin, successive layers of light over dark, withslight impasto in some areas. Infrared photography shows that the sitter was moved slightly to the right andhis jaw was lowered slightly.[2] The jaw originally ended at the present location of the sitter’s lips. An
amorphous shape in the X-radiographs in the area between the sitter’s back and the three canvases against thewall and brushwork unrelated to the final composition in this area implies that there was a more significant
compositional change. The X-radiographs also show large areas of reserve remain around the trumpet, fabric,
and the scarf in the lower left corner, indicating further changes in these areas. It appears the trumpet wasalso shifted to the right.
The panel remains in plane, but it has cracked along the vertical cradle members at the top and bottom of thepanel. There is a fair amount of abrasion to the paint in the background, the sitter’s robe, the lid of the trunk,and the shadows of the sitter’s face, and along the right edge. The painting was treated in 2002.

Technical Summary Endnotes

1. Ian Tyers, dendrochronological report, November 2010. Tyers states that the boards are narrower thannormal, leading him to surmise that they have been trimmed. Therefore he does not give a possible© 2024 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 17 of 17

creation date for the panel. Dr Peter Klein, who analyzed the panel on a separate occasion, does notcomment on the width of the boards and suggests an earliest possible creation date of 1630 (see Peter
Klein, dendrochronological report, 2010).
2. Infrared photography was taken by Annette Rupprecht at 780, 850, and 1000 nm.

© 2024 The Leiden Collection