Old Testament Figure, Probably KingSolomon
Arent de Gelder(Dordrecht 1645 – 1727 Dordrecht)

ca. 1685–90
oil on canvas
105.3 x 94.5 cm
signed on separate piece of canvas: “ADeGelder f.” (“AD” in ligature)
AG-104© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 2 of 7

How to cite
Manuth, Volker. “Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue,
2nd ed. Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/an-oldtestament-figure-probably-king-solomon/ (archived May 2020).
A PDF of every version of this entry is available in this Online Catalogue's Archive, and the Archive ismanaged by a permanent URL. New versions are added only when a substantive change to the narrative
occurs.

The sumptuously dressed Oriental ruler in Arent de Gelder’s imposing, life-Comparative Figures

sized painting has all the attributes of power, including an exotic turban
elaborately wound and adorned with pearls, a costly ermine cloak, and agold scepter, but his demeanor is that of a man weighed down by worldly
concerns. With his eyes lowered and darkened in shadow and a facial
expression that is resolute but muted, he stares off to his right, undoubtedlyreflecting deeply on issues of moral and ethical consequence. The specificmatters that have come before this potentate are not known, largely because
painting is a fragment of a history painting that was originally much larger. At
some point the canvas support was cropped on the left.[1] It is likely that thisruler is an Old Testament king.[2] Arent de Gelder’s King David, now inFig 1. Aernt de Gelder, KingDavid, 1680–85, oil oncanvas, 109.5 x 114.5
cm, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, SKA-2695

Amsterdam, which can be dated to 1680–83 (fig 1), and the figure ofAhasuerus in Ahasuerus and Haman of 1682–85, now in Birmingham (fig 2),wear comparable cloaks of royal distinction.[3]One can deduce the identity of this particular Old Testament king through aconsideration of his age. For example, his youthfulness makes him unlikely
to be King David. As in De Gelder’s Amsterdam painting (fig 1), King Davidwas traditionally portrayed as a bearded old man after his accession to thethrone. It is also unlikely that the painting depicts the Persian kingAhasuerus, despite the fact that he was often portrayed holding a golden
scepter, since he was generally shown as an elderly man with a beard (fig 2[4]).

De Gelder’s painting Esther’s Banquet of ca. 1680 in Dordrecht, in which

the king is younger and beardless, cannot serve as a point of reference,Fig 2. Arent de Gelder, Ahasuerusand Haman, 1680–84, oil oncanvas, 138.5 x 116.8 cm, The
Barber Institute of Fine Arts,© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 3 of 7

because his face is largely a recent reconstruction.[5]University of Birmingham,
Edgbaston

The Old Testament figure’s youthful appearance and beardlessness suggestthat he is King Solomon. It is conceivable that the complete scene
represented Solomon passing judgment on two women, both of whomclaimed to be the mother of the same child (1 Kings 3:16–28). In this scene
Solomon is traditionally portrayed as a young king on the throne, frequently
passing judgment while pointing down with his scepter. There are numerous
depictions of this composition. Worthy of mention is an engraving by BoëtiusAdamsz Bolswert after a lost painting by Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640) (fig 3). Another prominent example would have been known to De Gelder,
namely, the marble relief by Artus Quellinus the Elder (1609–68) in thetribunal (vierschaar) of the Amsterdam town hall built between 1650 and1664 (fig 4).
De Gelder, Rembrandt’s last pupil, remained faithful to his master’s lateFig 3. Boëtius Adamsz Bolswertafter Peter Paul Rubens, The
Judgment of Solomon, 1630–33,engraving, 44 x 51.3 cm, The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, NewYork, The Elisha Whittelsey
Collection, The Elisha Whittelsey
Fund, 1951, 51.501.7016,
www.metmuseum.org

expressive style throughout his career, even in the face of the prevailingclassicizing fashion. Although his sense of form was less stable thanRembrandt’s, his palette was more adventurous and colorful, partly throughhis effective use of colored grounds and other under layers of paint. Arnold
Houbraken describes how De Gelder varied his application of paint to depict
different textiles and patterns: he “scratched out the appearance of theembroidery or the threads of the fringe with the butt of his paintbrush, or by
any means possible, if only it furthered his aim; and it is astonishing how
natural and powerful such an approach sometimes looks from a distance.”[6]Fig 4. Artus Quellinus the Elder,Group above Portal, Magistrates’
Chamber, 1655, marble
relief, Royal Palace (Paleis op deDam), Amsterdam, © Stichting
Koninklijk Paleis Amsterdam

The present painting beautifully exemplifies this technique, for such
scratching into the wet paint, both broad and thin, occurs everywhere on thefigure’s clothing. De Gelder’s vigorous technique of scratching is particularly
evident in Solomon’s brown robe, where it both enlivens its form and gives it
structure. De Gelder’s characteristic warm palette and his richly varied
application of paint have an amazing ability to capture the surface qualities ofdifferent materials in a suggestive but convincing way.
It is difficult to date this picture precisely on the basis of stylistic comparison
because De Gelder dated few works from the 1690s and later. His SelfPortrait as Zeuxis in Frankfurt (fig 5) displays certain similarities to Old
Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon with regard to palette andFig 5. Arent de Gelder, SelfPortrait as Zeuxis, Who Portraysan Ugly Old Woman, 1685, oil oncanvas, Städel Museum, Frankfurt
am Main, © Städel Museum – U.
Edelmann – ARTOTHEK

brushwork, which suggests a date of around 1685–90.

- Volker Manuth, 2017
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 4 of 7Endnotes1. This reduction is evident by the lack of cusping on the left edge of the canvas. The painting
was originally signed. The signature survives on a separate strip of canvas (8 x 41 cm), whichmust have been cut off when the canvas was cut. The current location of the strip with thesignature is unknown.
2. For the most recent discussion of the iconography of the painting, see Volker Manuth in Dirck
Bijker, et al., Arent de Gelder (1645–1727), Rembrandts laatste leerling (Exh. cat. Dordrecht,Dordrechts Museum; Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum) (Ghent, 1998), 180–81, no. 25 (ill.).
3. For the painting in the Rijksmuseum, see Werner Sumowski, Gemälde der RembrandtSchüler, 6 vols. (Landau and Pfalz, 1983–94), 2: no. 788 (ill.); Joachim Wolfgang von Moltke,Arent de Gelder, Dordrecht 1645–1727 (Doornspijk, 1994), 28, 70, no. 21 (ill.) and in Dirck
Bijker et al., Arent de Gelder (1645–1727), Rembrandts laatste leerling (Exh. cat. Dordrecht,Dordrechts Museum; Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum) (Ghent, 1998), 162–63, no. 18 (ill.).
For the painting in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, Birmingham, see Sumowski, 2:1164, no.
739 (ill.); Joachim Wolfgang von Moltke, Arent de Gelder, Dordrecht 1645–1727, 36, 72, no.
26 (ill.); and Dirck Bijker, et al., Arent de Gelder (1645–1727), Rembrandts laatste
leerling (Exh. cat. Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum; Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum)(Ghent, 1998), 156–57, no. 16 (ill.).
4. Written communication (4 January 1995) from Peter Kidd to Otto Naumann Ltd., New York.
The association of Ahasuerus with the golden scepter stem from the account of Esther’smeeting with Ahasuerus: “And it was so, when the king saw Esther the queen standing in thecourt, that she obtained favor in his sight: and the king held out to Esther the golden scepterthat was in his hand. So Esther drew near, and touched the top of the scepter” (Esther 5:2).
5. When the restoration was carried out in Dordrecht in 1998, the physiognomy of the young
king in the painting in the Leiden Collection served as an example for the badly damaged faceof the figure in the Dordrecht painting. See Dirck Bijker et al., Arent de Gelder (1645–1727),
Rembrandts laatste leerling (Exh. cat. Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum; Cologne, WallrafRichartz-Museum) (Ghent, 1998), 154.
6. “Krabt de gedaante van het borduursel, of de draden der franje daar uit met zyn penceelstok,zonderende geene wyzen uit, als zy maar tot zyn oogmerk behulpig zyn; en ’t ist e
verwonderen hoe natuurlyk en kragtig zulk doen somwylen zig in affstant vertoont.” Arnold
Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, 3vols. (Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition published in The Hague, 1753; reprinted inAmsterdam, 1980), 3:207–8.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 5 of 7

Provenance
Private collection, Portugal, and thence by descent.
Private collection, Boston [Lepore Fine Arts, Newburyport, Mass., 1993; Otto Naumann, Ltd.,New York, 1993].
Mr. and Mrs. Bert van Deun, Oberageri, Switzerland, by 1997 [Otto Naumann, Ltd., New
York, 2004].
From whom purchased by the present owner in 2004.

Exhibition History
Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum, “Arent de Gelder (1645–1727), Rembrandts laatste leerling,”
10 October 1998–17 January 1999; Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, 17 January–19 May
1999. Ghent, 1998, 188–89, no. 25 [lent by Bert van Deun].
Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, on loan with the permanent collection, January 2015–February
2016 [lent by the present owner].
Beijing, National Museum of China, “Rembrandt and His Time: Masterpieces from The
Leiden Collection,” 17 June–3 September 2017 [lent by the present owner].
Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch GoldenAge: Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection,” 23 September 2017–25 February 2018 [lentby the present owner].
Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection,” 28 March 2018–22 July 2018 [lent by the presentowner].
St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection,” 5 September 2018–13 January 2019 [lent by thepresent owner].
Abu Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch Golden Age.
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre,” 14 February–18 May
2019 [lent by the present owner].

References© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 6 of 7Sumowski, Werner. Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler. 6 vols. Landau and Pfalz, 1983–94,
6:3712, no. 2291a.
Manuth, Volker. “Een koning uit het Oude Testament.” In Arent de Gelder (1645–1727),
Rembrandts laatste leerling. Edited by Dirk Bijker, et. al., 180, no. 25. Exh. cat. Dordrecht,Dordrechts Museum; Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum. Ghent, 1998.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon.” In Rembrandt andHis Time: Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection. Edited by Lara Yeager-Crasselt, 166–67;
190, no. 73. Translated by Li Ying. Exh. cat. Beijing, National Museum of China. Beijing,
2017.
Long Museum, West Bund. Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch Golden Age:Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection. Exh. cat. Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund.
Shanghai, 2017, 185–86.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon.” In The Age ofRembrandt and Vermeer: Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina
Lyubimova, 78–79; 232, no. 6. Translated by Daria Babich and Daria Kuzina. Exh. cat.
Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts; St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage
Museum. Moscow, 2018.
Ducos, Blaise, and Lara Yeager-Crasselt, eds. Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch GoldenAge. Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre. Exh. cat. Abu
Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi. London, 2019, 103, no. 34. [Exhibition catalogue also published inFrench and Arabic.]

Technical Summary
The painting is a fragment of a larger composition. The support, a single piece of medium-weight,
plain-weave fabric, has been reduced in size along the length of the left edge and has been lined.
The tacking margins have been removed, and there is cusping along the upper, right and loweredges. An inventory number handwritten in a radio-opaque medium is located in the upper rightquadrant of the support reverse. There are no wax collection seals, stencils, paper labels or
import stamps along the lining or stretcher reverse.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied. The paint has been applied in loose,
fluid brushstrokes of transparent glazes through the brown background, figure’s turban, browngarment, proper left sleeve, fur robe, and red drapery, which allow a light-colored underlayer toshow through, and more opaquely through the fleshtones. Dabs of highlights through theornamentation along the figure’s turban, in the jewel-encrusted band across his chest, and along
the scepter handle have been applied in low impasto. Details along the figure’s brown garment© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Old Testament Figure, Probably King Solomon
Page 7 of 7

have been scratched into glazes of wet paint with both a half-centimeter-wide tool and the pointedend of the back of a brush. The turban plume has been created entirely by scratching into the wet
paint of the brown background with the pointed end of the back of a brush and allowing the lightunderlayer to show through.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images captured at 780–1000 nanometers, but
the images reveal a compositional change to the figure’s proper left hand. Originally, only the tipof the thumb peeked out from behind the index finger. Subsequently, the tip of the thumb wasshortened and the entire length of the thumb was added.
The painting is unsigned and undated. An 8 cm-high by 41 cm-wide fragment of the fabricremoved from the left edge bore the original signature.[1] A 1993 image shows the painting with an
8 cm-high fabric addition composed of two sections attached to the width of the upper edge. The
left section was the fragment bearing the signature. Sometime prior to 1995, both sections of theaddition were removed and the fragment bearing the signature was retained and framed.[2]The painting underwent conservation treatment in 1993 prior to its acquisition and remains in agood state of preservation.[3]Technical Summary Endnotes

1. Werner Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler in vier Bänden, 6 vols. (Landau,1983), 6:3712, no. 2291a, reproduced in color p. 3885.
2. Unfortunately, the framed signature fragment could not be located. Canvas weave analysis of
the signature fragment and painting support could provide information regarding the originalposition of the signature and the painting’s original overall dimensions.
3. The painting was examined on-site with no stereomicroscope. Magnification provided by 5xOptivisor.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection