© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 2 of 24

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)

1635
oil on oval panel
79.5 x 59.3 cm
signed and dated at lower left: “Rembrandt·f.
1635″
RR-115

Rembrandt van Rijn
(Leiden 1606 – 1669 Amsterdam)

How to cite
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)” (2019). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 3rd ed.
EditedbyArthurK.

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 this engaging half-length portrait, Rembrandt captured the gentle sensibility of the[1]

twenty-nine-year-old Petronella Buys.

Comparative Figures

Turned in a three-quarter view and seated

before a gray curtain, Petronella gazes out warmly at the viewer, her subtle smile
creating small dimples on her pink cheeks. Her wide, brown eyes glisten in the
daylight streaming down from the upper left. She is dressed in all of her finery. A
double strand of pearls sets off her face from the expansive white-wheel lace ruff that
extends across the width of her shoulders.[2] Beneath the ruff she wears an elegant
lace bib, decorated with a brooch, and gold chains that hang across her brocaded
black costume. Petronella’s hair, pulled high above her forehead, is silhouetted with alace-and-pearl-trimmed bonnet. A jeweled pendant is nestled into her coiffure.
The sitter’s identity is known from an inscription in Dutch that was formerly visibleon the painting’s verso: “Ms. Petronella Buijs, his wife / after this married to[3]

Burgomaster Cardon.”As Cornelis Hofstede de Groot demonstrated in 1913, “his”

refers to Petronella’s first husband, Philips Lucasz (ca. 1598–1641), an officer in the
Dutch East India Company (V.O.C.).[4] Rembrandt painted Petronella—and theFig 1. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portrait ofPhilip Lucasz, 1635, oil on panel, 79.5
x 58.9 cm, The National Gallery,
London, inv. no. NG850 © The
National Gallery, London / Art
Resource, NY© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 3 of 24

pendant portrait of Philips, now in the National Gallery London (fig 1)—in 1635,
some months after the couple’s marriage in August 1634.[5] Philips and Petronella had
first met in Batavia, where she had traveled in 1629 with her sisters Geertruyd(1613–77) and Maria Odilia (died 1636), as well as with Maria Odilia’s husband,
Jacques Specx (1588/89–1652).[6] Petronella and Philips returned to the Netherlands
in late 1633, and announced their marriage in Amsterdam on 4 August 1634. The
preacher Johannes Sylvius, a relative of Rembrandt, married the couple three weeks
later in the Nieuwe Kerk.[7] Shortly after Rembrandt completed their portraits in
1635, Petronella and Philips left again for the Dutch East Indies on 2 May 1635;
there, Philips resumed his role as councillor general extraordinary.[8] After Philips’s
death at sea in 1641, Petronella settled in the Netherlands.[9] She married Johan
Cardon in January 1646 and lived the remainder of her life in Vlissingen, where
Cardon served twice as Burgomaster.[10]The portraits of Petronella and Philips are first documented in 1655 in the collection

Fig 2. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portrait ofa Woman, 1633, oil on panel, 63 x 48
cm, Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum
Braunschweig, Kunstmuseum desLandes Niedersachsen, inv. no.
GG233, Fotonachweis:
Museumsfotograf

of Jacques Specx, Petronella’s brother-in-law. In the division of his estate on 31
August, Specx’s daughter, Maria, received “two ditto (portraits) of Mr. Placas [Philips
Lucas] deceased, and of his wife [dated] 1635 by Rembrandt.”[11] An inventory ofSpecx’s collection taken two years earlier, on 13 January 1653, refers to “Tweeconterfeytsels (two portraits),” which are likely the same paintings.[12] The fact thatSpecx had bequeathed the portraits to Petronella’s niece when Petronella was still
alive led I.H. van Eeghen to suggest that Specx either commissioned the portraits orreceived them as gifts from the couple prior to their departure for Batavia.[13] Specx’s
patronage of Rembrandt in the first half of the 1630s, following his return to theNetherlands in 1633, supports the former scenario.[14] He owned three other paintings
by Rembrandt from that period of the artist’s career; these have been plausibly
identified as Christ on the Sea of Galilee, 1633 (formerly Boston, Isabella Stewart
Gardener Museum); The Apostle Paul in Prison, 1631 (Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie); andthe Abduction of Europa, 1632 (Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum).[15]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz, which had been together eversince 1635, were separated sometime before the early nineteenth century.[16] Prior to
1989, when Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak of the Rembrandt Research Project raised

Fig 3. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portrait of
Oopjen Coppit (1611–1689), 1634, oilon canvas, 207.5 x 132 cm, joint
acquisition by the Dutch State and theFrench Republic, collection
Rijksmuseum / collection Musée du
Louvre, inv. no. SK-C-1768

attribution questions about them, they had always been accepted as fine portraits by
the master.[17] Bruyn and Haak argued, however, that Rembrandt executed only theface of Philips Lucasz, while a workshop assistant painted his costume and collar, as
well as the entirety of Petronella Buys’s portrait.[18] Among their criticisms ofPetronella’s portrait were the modeling of the face and the treatment of light andshadow, as well as the handling of the lace in the diadem cap, ruff, and bib.[19] Ernst
van de Wetering also believes that a workshop assistant executed Petronella’s face andlarge portions of her costume, although he has recently concluded that Rembrandt

Fig 4. Rembrandt van Rijn, detail offace of Portrait of Oopjen Coppit© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 4 of 24

executed her collar and ruff.[20]The opinions expressed by Bruyn and Haak about the pendant portraits of Philips
Lucasz and Petronella Buys have been critically received by a number of scholars,
including Gary Schwartz, Christian Tümpel, and Walter Liedtke.[21] The most(1611–1689), 1634, oil on canvas,
207.5 x 132 cm, joint acquisition by
the Dutch State and the French
Republic, collection Rijksmuseum /collection Musée du Louvre, inv. no.
SK-C-1768

extensive arguments for attributing the portraits to Rembrandt were made by David
Bomford, Christopher Brown, and Ashok Roy in several National Gallery
publications.[22] These scholars argued that Philips’s portrait did not involve the handof a workshop assistant, and that the couple’s portraits were entirely by Rembrandt.[23]One of their central arguments in favor of an attribution for Philips Lucasz is that
Rembrandt used “a kind of brilliant shorthand” for the execution of his collar—atechnique, they explain, that the artist would have adopted when working underpressure.[24] Whether or not the factor of “speed” can account for the bravura of thistechnique, which is also evident in Petronella’s bib, this innovative “shorthand”
approach is characteristic of Rembrandt’s lace in the mid-1630s.[25] Here, as
elsewhere, Rembrandt seems to have devised new technical approaches for depictingchanges in fashion by applying black paint over white with free and confident
brushstrokes.[26] Alive with energy, his paint creates a splendid three-dimensional
effect throughout Petronella’s ruff, as the individual segments of the lace respond to
subtleties of light and shadow.
The stylistic and technical similarities in the portraits of Philips and Petronella wereparticularly evident in 2017 when the two paintings were reunited in a study session at
the National Gallery in London.[27] The juxtaposition of these two portraits reinforced
the opinion that they had been executed by the same hand.[28] Depicted before agrayish, draped background,[29] Philips Lucasz and Petronella Buys make compelling
pendants as they turn toward each other with inner strength and personal conviction.
Philips turns slightly away from the light, which allows light and shade to model his
features in a forceful and expressive way. Petronella, who is set slightly further backFig 5. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portrait ofa Young Woman, 1633, oil on wood,
65.3 × 48.8 cm, Museum of Fine Arts,
Houston, The Museum of Fine Arts,
Houston, Museum purchase funded by
Iabel B. and Wallace S. Wilson, theAlice Pratt Brown Museum Fund,
Caroline Weiss Law, Fayez Sarofim,
the Blanton and Wareing families inhonor of Laura Lee Blanton, theAgnes Cullen Arnold Endowment
Fund, the Fondren Foundation,
Houston Endowment Inc., Mr. andMrs. George P. Mitchell, Ethel G.
Carruth, Mr. and Mrs. Charles W.
Tate, and Nina and Michael Zilkha,
with additional funding from the
Linda and Ronny Finger Goundation,
Ann Trammell, and Mr. and Mrs.
Temple Webber in memory of
Caroline Weiss Law, 2004.3

from the picture plane, faces toward the light, which falls brightly and evenly acrossher face. Rembrandt used a cool palette with warm highlights in both paintings, andcaptured the effects of light rippling across the fabric in the background.[30]Rembrandt portrayed the distinctive physical appearances and personalities of Philips
and Petronella with great assurance, highlighting their respective individualities ashusband and wife by varying his pictorial vocabulary in subtle ways.[31] As Van deWetering has explained when discussing Rembrandt’s varied painting techniques in
portraiture—here in relation to the master’s pendant portraits of 1633 in
Braunschweig (fig 2)—“the execution of faces could vary from portrait to portrait” asa result of the “speed” required by the commission or other “demands” by thesitters.[32] These factors are likewise relevant when considering the distinctive aspects© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 5 of 24

of the portraits of Petronella and Philips. Whereas Rembrandt depicted Philips’s facewith great freedom, layering short, quick brushstrokes of pinks and yellows to createrich facial textures and a ruddy complexion, he rendered Petronella’s features moredelicately and carefully. He painted her face with smooth, subtle brushstrokes of gray,brown, and ochre paints, while using a wet-into-wet technique to convey her porcelainlike complexion. Flesh-colored highlights define the inner corners of her eyes, andstrokes of reddish-pink paint articulate the shadow on her nose.[33]The painting techniques Rembrandt used to model Petronella’s features are also foundin other female portraits that he executed in the first half of the 1630s. The smoothbrushwork is comparable, for example, to the stylistic character of at least three
paintings from this period: Portrait of a Woman in Braunschweig (fig 2), which
demonstrates an even greater degree of control and refinement in the paint handling;
Portrait of Oopjen Coppit in Amsterdam (fig 3) and (fig 4), and Portrait of a Young
Woman in Houston (fig 5).[34] Rembrandt modeled the faces in the latter two portraits
somewhat more extensively than he did with Petronella, but he maintained a similarangle of light falling over the figures in order to achieve clarity of forms.[35] He also
used reddish-brown tones and flesh-colored highlights to model the eye sockets,
reddish-pink highlights on the lips, and soft pinks on the chins and upper cheeks.
Underdrawing applied with a brush is faintly visible around both Petronella andOopjen’s nostrils and lips, indicating the degree of care Rembrandt took in rendering
his sitters.[36] Areas of underpainting and underdrawing (in paint) are also present in
Philips’s portrait, including in the right eyebrow and around the eyes.[37] These
commonalities in technique situate Petronella comfortably within the framework of
Rembrandt’s portraiture in this period.
The differing opinions that continue to exist about the attributions of Portrait ofPetronella Buys and Portrait of Philips Lucasz reflect uncertainties about how the
Rembrandt workshop functioned between 1631 and 1635 when he was working forthe art dealer Hendrick Uylenburgh (1584/89–ca. 1660). The workshop focused on
the production of commissioned portraits, and it is likely that Rembrandt had pupils
and assistants to help him meet the high level of demand.[38] In Dutch and Flemish
portrait traditions it was not uncommon for a master to collaborate with an assistant incompleting a portrait, with the master painting the face and hands and the assistantexecuting the costume.[39] Rembrandt himself is believed to have worked in this way
on occasion.[40] Nevertheless, it is not certain who might have assisted Rembrandt in
his portrait production in the first half of the 1630s. Dirk van Santvoort(1610/11–80), highly skilled in painting lace collars, may have had connections to theworkshop, but his participation is not documented; nor is that of Isaac de Jouderville(ca. 1612–48), Rembrandt’s Leiden pupil, who may have continued to serve as an
assistant to his master in the early 1630s in Amsterdam.[41] Govaert Flinck (1615–60)© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 6 of 24

and Jacob Backer (1608/9–51), on the other hand, were members of the workshop
between 1633 and 1635.[42]Discussion about the attribution of these pendant portraits also must consider thenature of the commission, as well as the relationships that existed between the artist
and the sitters. As previously noted, Rembrandt likely painted these portraits for
Jacques Specx, who had already bought three of Rembrandt’s history paintings in theearly 1630s.[43] Specx was not only an important patron of Rembrandt, he was also
Petronella’s brother-in-law.[44] Furthermore, he had served as a witness at theannouncement of her marriage to Philips Lucasz. All of these factors make it quite
improbable that Rembrandt would have assigned a workshop assistant to execute
Petronella’s portrait. Relevant for this discussion is a question Albert Blankert posed
about a patron’s expectations for a commissioned portrait: “When people gave such acommission to a famous and expensive artist, would they not have cared whether thetask was carried out by the master himself or an assistant?”[45] Aside from theunlikelihood that a workshop assistant painted the entirety of the painting, Van der
Wetering’s proposal that an assistant executed Petronella’s face and Rembrandt the
ruff and collar is contrary to the character of workshop collaboration.[46]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz are fascinating examples ofRembrandt’s portrait production in the mid-1630s. The remarkable history of these
portraits and the distinctive and compelling manner with which they were painted
strongly support their attribution to Rembrandt. Commemorating Petronella andPhilips’s marriage and marking Philips’s service to the V.O.C., the pendants would
have constituted important additions to Jacques Specx’s admirable collection of
Rembrandt paintings. For Frederick Schmidt-Degener, who would later become
director of both the Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen and the Rijksmuseum,
Petronella’s portrait represented “one of those beautiful and strong paintings full of
distinction that Rembrandt, [who] became the painter of Amsterdam’s high society,executed around 1631 to 1636.”[47]- Lara Yeager-Crasselt, with contributions by Leonore van Sloten, 2017

© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 7 of 24

Endnotes
1. The Leiden Collection would like to acknowledge the contributions made by Leonore van Sloten to thisentry, including the biographical and archival material relating to Petronella’s life and her family,
technical considerations about the painting, and communication with Ernst van de Wetering.
Petronella Buys’s birth date has been consistently published throughout the literature as 1610, but theauthor and Leonore van Sloten have determined that the correct date is 1605. In the marriage
announcement of Petronella and her husband, Philips Lucasz, dated 4 August 1634, Petronella’s age is
given as 29 years old. Stadsarchief Amsterdam: doop-, trouw- en begravenisregister nr. 442, p. 334.
Harmen Snel (Amsterdam City Archives) confirmed the interpretation of the second number as a “9”after having checked the original document. The birth date of 1605 is also given in Josua Bruyn et al., A
Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (The Hague, 1989), A115, 181. No source is indicated; Petronella’s baptism in The Hague could
not be traced by the authors. Her tombstone in Vlissingen mentions 1610 as her year of birth. See P.J.
Rethaan Macaré, Wapenborden en Wapens op Tombes, Monumenten en Grafgesteenten in de kerken vande voormalige Provincie Zeeland tot in 1798, Koninklijk Nederlandsch Genootschap voor Geslacht- en
Wapenkunde, Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie, The Hague. The Familieboekje van Barent Somer(1588–1633) (Zeeuws Archief, toegangsnummer 157/80) mentions that Petronella, the wife of Johan
Cardon (her second husband), died on 26 September 1670, and was buried on 3 October of that year:“26 Septemb. 1670 / ’S morgens omtrent 4 uuren is overleden Petronella Buijs huisvrouw van Hr. Johan
Cardon, mijn behoud moeij. 3 octb. Begraven.”
2. For similar clothing and hair fashion, see, for example, Portrait of Oopjen Coppit (fig 3) and Portrait ofa Woman Wearing a Gold Chain, 1634 (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston). Petronella’s double collar isnotable but not uncommon. In the 1630s, the mill ruff was slowly being replaced by the flat collar. The
combination of the two worn by Petronella reflects this transitional period in women’s fashion. Rudi
Ekkart kindly provided further information about these collars in personal correspondence with Leonore
van Sloten (dated December 10, 2018).
3. “Jonckvr. Petronella Buijs: sijne Huijsvr. Naer dato getrout aen de Hr. Borgerm. Cardon.” The seventeenthcentury inscription was likely covered in the early twentieth century when the panel was cradled. As
noted by Martin Wyld, a signature on one of the horizontal crossbars of the cradle is dated 1914.
Cornelis Hofstede de Groot transcribed the inscription in 1913; see Hofstede de Groot, “Rembrandts
portretten van Philips Lucasse en Petronella Buys,” Oud Holland 31, no. 5 (1913): 236–40. Wilhelm vonBode published the portrait as depicting Petronella Buys in his monograph on Rembrandt in 1897 (basedon the inscription on its verso), but Hofstede de Groot was the first to mention the inscription anddetermine the portrait’s pendant. See Wilhelm von Bode and Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, The Complete
Work of Rembrandt, History, Description and Heliographic Reproduction of All the Master’s Pictures, witha Study of His Life, vol. 2 (Paris, 1897), 11, 115–16, no. 118.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 8 of 24

4. Petronella married her second husband, Johan Cardon (1603–1671) in January 1646. See note 10.
5. There are remnants of an inscription on the verso of Philips’s portrait, but it is no longer discernable.
Without direct comparison to the inscription on Petronella’s portrait, it is not possible to ascertain
whether the inscriptions are by the same hand. For the National Gallery painting, see Neil MacLaren,
National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900, vol. 1 (London, 1960), no. 850; Josua Bruyn
et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (The Hague, 1989), A115; Neil MacLaren and Christopher Brown, National Gallery Catalogues:
The Dutch School 1600–1900, vol. 1 (London, 1991), no. 850; David Bomford, ed., Rembrandt: Art in
the Making (Exh. cat. London, National Gallery) (London, 1988), 52–57; David Bomford et al.,Rembrandt: Art in the Making (London, 2006), 82–88.
6. Petronella and Geertruyd travelled to Batavia (Jakarta) with Maria Odilia and Specx in search of amarriage candidate for Petronella. Specx held prominent roles in the V.O.C., having established tradewith Japan in 1609 and later serving as governor of Batavia. Philips formerly served as the East India
Company’s chief trader or Opperkoopman (1625) and as the Secunde and governor on the island ofAmboina (the Moluccas) from 1628 to 1631. In 1631 he was appointed as commissioner extraordinaryof the Indies, which resulted in his move to Batavia. See Willem Philppus Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De
Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw
gearbeid is voor de culturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam, 1973), 29–63.
7. The return convoy under the command of Philips Lucasz arrived in Amsterdam on 20 December 1633.
Early sources incorrectly state that Philips and Petronella married in Batavia. M.E. van Opstall(Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague) discovered and correctly identified the date of the notice, or
announcement, of their marriage in Amsterdam on 4 August 1634 and the subsequent baptism of theirdaughter, Françoise, in Batavia on 30 September 1635. The original marriage banns are located in theStadsarchief Amsterdam: doop-, trouw- en begravenisregister nr. 442, p. 334, 4 August 1634:“Compareerden als voren. Philips Luijcazn van Middelburg. out 36 jaren woont op de Herengraft
geassis en Pietronelle Buijs. Van sgravenhage. out 29 Jaren. geassisteert met haer suster ende swager deGenerael Spexs wonende op de Keysersgraft.” Maria Odilia Buys and Jacques Specx served as witnesses
to this announcement. See also Neil MacLaren and Christopher Brown, National Gallery Catalogues: The
Dutch School 1600–1900, vol. 1 (London, 1991), 344–45n5. The actual marriage took place on 27
August of that year, in the Nieuwe Kerk: Stadsarchief Amsterdam, inventarissen, toegangsnummer 5001,
trouwregisters van de kerken, inv. no. 989, p. 492. Jaap van der Veen provided indispensable help in
tracing the date of marriage, which has not been previously published.
8. Philips was rewarded for his service to the Dutch East India Company on 31 January 1635 with 1,000
ricxdaelders from the V.O.C. The Directors of the East India Company awarded gold chains to thosecommanders who had successfully returned home with their merchant fleets. The gold chains worn by
Philips in the portrait—which would otherwise be an unusual part of his dress—indicate his receipt of
this award and constitute further evidence for the 1635 dating of the painting. After he and Petronella
left the Netherlands on 2 May 1635, they arrived in Batavia over four months later, on 20 September© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 9 of 24

1635.
9. On 5 March 1640 Philips died at sea on the ship de Santvoort during his return to Batavia from an
expedition to Ceylon, where he had taken the Fort of Negombo in February of that year. Lucasz wasburied in Batavia, see P.A. Leupe, Philip Lucasz., raad en directeur-generaal van Nederl.-Indië (Almanak
Zeeland, 1855). Upon her return to the Netherlands, Petronella moved into the home of Specx, known
as the “Dubbele Arend,” on the Keizersgracht in Amsterdam. For the biographical details on Philips andPetronella, see Cornelis Hofstede de Groot, “Rembrandts portretten van Philips Lucasse en Petronella
Buys,” Oud Holland 31, no. 5 (1913): 236–40; I.H. van Eeghen, “De Portretten van Philips Lucas en
Petronella Buys,” Maandblad Amstelodamum 43 (1956): 116; Willem Philippus Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De
Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw
gearbeid is voor de culturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam, 1973), 63–64;
Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3: 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), 3: A115, C111.
10. Petronella Buys and Johan Cardon announced their marriage in Amsterdam on 21 December 1645 andin Vlissingen on 23 December 1645. The actual date of their marriage in Vlissingen cannot be traced,but it occurred sometime in January 1646. See Stadsarchief Amsterdam: doop-, trouw- en
begravenisregister nr. 462, p. 458, 21 December 1645: “Compareerden voor Jan Michielz Blaew en mr
Gerrit van Helmont Joan Cardon van Vlissingen, burgemeester tot Vlissingen, out 42 Jaren, noch een
moeder hebbende en Pietronelle Buijs uyt sgravenhage, weduwe van Philip Lucas, woonende opde
Keisergraft verclarende 5 Jaer weduwe te zijn geweest.” Ron Roose (Gemeentearchief Middelburg) andAliceanneke Jacobsen (Infocentrum Zeeuws Archief, Middelburg) kindly provided assistance with thearchival research related to the announcements and marriage of Petronella and Cardon.
Johan Cardon was an official of the East Indian Company for the kamer Middelburg and served as
burgomaster of Vlissingen from 1641 to 1647 and again from 1669 to 1670. See Willem Philippus
Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd,
nu daer een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor de culturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika(Amsterdam, 1973), 63–64. See also François Valentijn, Oud en niew Oost-Indiën, ed. S. Keijser, vol. 1(1855), 127–28, 131, 425; vol. 2 (1856), 446, 450, 467, 470.
11. “Schilderijen toegevallen de dochter 2 d.º [contrefeijtsels] van den Hr. Placas salr en sijn huijsvrouw aº1635 door Rembrandt.” Gemeentearchief, Amsterdam, Scheiding van de boedel van Jacques Specx,
Records of the Notary Justus van de Ven, NA 114, fol. 269. Excerpts from the inventory are publishedin Walter L. Strauss and Marjon van der Meulen, The Rembrandt Documents (New York, 1979),
327–28.
12. The “two portraits” are mentioned in the middle of the list of Rembrandt paintings owned by Specx,
under nos. 17 and 18 (“Twee conterfeytsels”). Gemeentearchief, Amsterdam, Inventaris van Jacques
Specx, Records of the Notary Pieter de Bary, NA 1698, fol. 869. See also Willem Philippus Coolhaas,
Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar
een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor de culturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam,© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 10 of 241973), 57; Walter L. Strauss and Marjon van der Meulen, The Rembrandt Documents (New York, 1979),
296–97; and online in RemDoc, document/remdoc/e4626.
13. See online in RemDoc: document/remdoc/e4681. See also I.H. van Eeghen, “De Portretten van Philips
Lucas en Petronella Buys,” Maandblad Amstelodamum 43 (1956): 116.
14. Specx left Batavia at the beginning of December 1632, together with his wife, Maria Odilia. They
arrived in Amsterdam in July 1633. Willem Philippus Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis
Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor deculturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam, 1973), 48–49.
15. “Een scheepgen petri van Rembrant; Een St. Paulus van Rembrand; Een Europa van Rembrant [sic].”
Gemeentearchief, Amsterdam, Inventaris van Jacques Specx, Records of the Notary Pieter de Bary, NA
1698, fol. 869. See Willem Philippus Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht
141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor de culturele eneconomische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam, 1973), 56–58; Walter L. Strauss and Marjon
van der Meulen, The Rembrandt Documents (New York, 1979), 296–97.
16. The Portrait of Philips Lucasz was in the collection of Sir Robert Peel by 1836 and purchased by the
National Gallery with the Peel collection in 1871. For the portrait of Petronella, see Provenance. In
Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), A115; and in Rembrandt: Art in the Making (Exh. cat.
London, National Gallery) (London, 2006), 84–86, it has been stated that Philips’s portrait was cut down
and altered from a rectangle into its present oval shape, possibly as early as the seventeenth century. The
oak panel has straight beveling on the back, along the bottom and sides, indicating that it was cut downfrom a rectangular shape. This evidence is supported by the abrupt end of the brushstrokes on the edgeof the panel and indications of the “crumbling termination of the paint layer.” The National Gallery
authors argue that the alteration of the panel may have impacted the placement of the sitter’s left hand,which is no longer visible in the painting (it is visible in the X-ray). The hand was discovered during
cleanings in 1941 and 1977; during the latter cleaning, restorers determined that the paint covering thehand was not original and decided to remove it. They considered the hand to be “clumsy and shapeless”
and “so unsatisfactory in appearance” that they decided to paint it out again. Considering that some ofthe pigments used in the hand date from the seventeenth century, and that the colors in the flesh tone arefound in other works by Rembrandt from the 1630s, it is possible that the artist may have painted out
the hand himself. The National Gallery authors maintain that the painting and subsequent painting out of
the hand “coincided with the reduction of the panel to an oval.”
An aspect related to the shape of the paintings is the frame in which Philips’s portrait is currently onview in the National Gallery. Peter Schade, head of the Framing Department of the National Gallery,shared his ideas on this frame with The Leiden Collection via email (dated 5 December 2018). Schadeconfirmed that the present oval frame is of Dutch origin and, based on style and material, likely dates
from the middle of the seventeenth century. Schade suggested that it may have been produced
specifically for Philips’s portrait.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 11 of 24

Although there is no evidence to indicate that Petronella’s panel was cut down or reduced in size, theauthors of Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), C111, suggest that her portrait may have also beenoriginally rectangular and cut down into an oval like its pendant. Cradling on the back of the panel and a
wax coating prevent a full investigation into these questions (see condition report by Simon Howell kept
on file at The Leiden Collection). However, given the strong pictorial relationship between the portraits,
which is discussed at greater length below, and the fact that Philips was clearly posed to be paired with apendant, it seems highly unlikely that the paintings would not have been conceived and executed in thesame format at the time of the commission. Another possibility, suggested by Leonore van Sloten, is thatthe portraits may have been originally painted on rectangular panels, but were surrounded by an oval
“window,” a compositional format that Rembrandt often followed (see Self-Portrait with Shaded Eyes,
RR-110). The panels may have been cut into an oval shape at a later time. Further technical research
will have to be conducted to resolve some of these outstanding questions regarding Petronella’s panel;for discussion of the latter possibility of a painted oval format, which has also been suggested forRembrandt’s Portrait of a Man in a Red Coat, see Volker Manuth, “Portrait of a Man in a Red Coat,” inThe

LeidenCollection

Catalogue,ed.

ArthurK.

Wheelock

Jr.

(New

York,

2017),

https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/.
17. See References.
18. In Corpus III, Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak expressed doubts over the execution of the lace of Philips’s
collar, highlighting the “partly bold flicks and strokes in white and small lines and dots in grey andblack,” that do not show “the proper balance between an interesting brushwork and a convincing
suggestion of a regular lace pattern, such as we are used to seeing in Rembrandt’s autograph lace collars
from the years 1633 and 1634.” They similarly doubted the execution of the gold chains and “thesuperficial execution of the shiny sleeve.” Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3:
1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), A115; for the
discussion of Petronella’s attribution, see C111.
19. Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak described what they considered the “uniformly opaque” quality in the lit andshadowed parts of Petronella’s face and the “linear” and “insensitive” treatment of her eyes. They werealso critical of the costume, and described a “confused” rendering of the lace in the diadem cap, the rimof the wheel ruff, and bib. Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642,
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), 3: C111. Bruyn and Haak statethat the working conditions in which the painting was studied were not particularly good: “Examined [. .
.] under moderate lighting, in the frame and on the wall.” It is also mentioned that Bob Haak and Ernst
van de Wetering viewed this painting in October 1971, but, according to Van de Wetering, he had notseen the painting in person until 2018.
Bruyn and Haak also expressed doubt about the authenticity of the signature in Petronella’s portrait.
Although they note that the diagonal line placed below the date occurs in signatures from 1632, 1633,
and 1634, they argue that the way in which the inscription “rises steeply to the right and is placed© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 12 of 24

hesitantly, does not make an authentic impression.” Van de Wetering has remarked that Rembrandt
typically placed his signatures on one work within a pair or group of paintings, making it
uncommon—though not exceptional—to find signatures on both pendants. Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus
of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3: 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The
Hague, 1989), 3: 695.
Simon Howell has noted from a visual inspection of the painting that the signature appears to be“consistent with it being painted at or around the time of the portrait.” The signature and date areslightly worn and the paint has not been applied over paint losses or cracks (personal correspondencewith The Leiden Collection, 5 February 2019). In Neil MacLaren and Christopher Brown, National
Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900, vol. 1 (London, 1991), no. 850, 345n1, the authors
indicate that the signature on Portrait of Philips Lucasz (“clearly genuine and not retouched”) may havebeen followed by an “f” as in the portrait of Petronella.
20. In Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6: Rembrandt’s Paintings
Revisited: A Complete Survey, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 6:
544, no. 132b, Van de Wetering attributes Petronella’s portrait to “Rembrandt and Workshop” but statesin the accompanying text that she “seems to be entirely painted by an assistant.” However, after viewing
the painting at the Rembrandthuis in 2018, the first time he had seen it in person, he revised his opinion.
He has now concluded (in verbal communication with Leonore van Sloten) that the rapid and virtuoso
brushwork in the outer part of the ruff is characteristic of Rembrandt’s hand.
21. Gary Schwartz, Rembrandt, His Life, His Paintings: A New Biography with All Accessible Paintings
Illustrated in Colour (New York, 1985), 164; Christian Tümpel, Rembrandt: All Paintings in Colour(Antwerp, 1993), 67; Walter Liedtke, “Rembrandt’s Workshop Revisited,” Oud Holland 117 (2004): 67.
22. These views were expressed in publications including David Bomford, ed., Rembrandt: Art in the Making(Exh. cat. London, National Gallery) (London, 1988), 52–57; Neil MacLaren and Christopher Brown,
National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900, 2 vols. (London, 1991), 1: no. 850; andDavid Bomford et al., Rembrandt: Art in the Making (London, 2006), 82–88.
23. The National Gallery authors focused their argument on the portrait of Philips and discussed Petronella
only briefly in relation to her pendant. They did not directly refute the criticisms of the Rembrandt
Research Project. Christopher Brown, former chief curator at the National Gallery, London, noted inpersonal correspondence with The Leiden Collection that he had seen the painting in the mid-1980s(with Wildenstein).
24. In David Bomford et al., Rembrandt: Art in the Making (London, 2006), 87, the point is made that “theassistant theory [for the collar of the Portrait of Philips Lucasz] is an attractive one, because it explainsaway the weaker passages that we are reluctant to attribute to Rembrandt. It also explains thediscontinuity where the flesh of Philips’ neck meets the collar: the two were clearly painted in separate
operations and superficially joined by a highlight and shadow afterwards. But this in itself does not
exclude Rembrandt’s authorship of both parts, especially if he painted under great pressure. It is ourview that the whole collar is by his hand and that it should be viewed as if painted in a kind of brilliant© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 13 of 24

shorthand. It is difficult to imagine a worthy but pedestrian assistant supplying these flourishes to thelace: it is more plausible to say that here is a great painter working at speed, perhaps not trying very
hard.”
25. In a recently published article on Portrait of Oopjen Coppit and Portrait of Marten Soolmans, the authors
argue that Rembrandt’s technique of painting bobbin lace by using black on top of white is evidence of
his extraordinary skill and inventiveness in the 1630s. Rembrandt moved away from the more traditional
method of painting lace with white on top of black at the same time as Frans Hals in the early 1630s.
The two artists may have encountered one another in Uylenburgh’s workshop. See Petria Noble et al.,
“An Exceptional Commission: Conservation History, Treatment and Painting Technique of Rembrandt’s
Marten and Oopjen, 1634,” Rijksmuseum Bulletin 66, no. 4 (2018): 334–37; Bas Dudok van Heel,“Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh,” in Stephanie Dickey,ed., Rembrandt and His Circle: Insights and Discoveries (Amsterdam, 2017), 17–43. For earlier
discussions of Rembrandt’s painting of lace, see Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings,
vol. 2: 1631–1634, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1986), 2: 62–76.
26. See Petria Noble et al., “An Exceptional Commission: Conservation History, Treatment and Painting
Technique of Rembrandt’s Marten and Oopjen, 1634,” Rijksmuseum Bulletin 66, no. 4 (2018): 334–37.
27. Petronella’s portrait had been sequestered in a private collection for nearly thirty years and seen by few
scholars in that time, but, according to Christopher Brown, former chief curator at the National Gallery,
London, it had been previously brought together with the portrait of Philips at the National Gallery (inthe mid-1980s). In personal correspondence with The Leiden Collection, Brown expressed his opinion
that both paintings are entirely by Rembrandt.
28. Bart Cornelis, curator of Dutch and Flemish paintings at the National Gallery, kindly shared photos ofthis meeting with The Leiden Collection.
29. Differences exist in the relative opaqueness of the backgrounds of the two paintings. Martin Wyld, whocleaned Petronella’s portrait before it was auctioned in 2017, stated in his condition report for Christie’sthat the background was—in his opinion—“thinly painted.” In an email dated 5 December 2018, he
explained that there might “be some very slight abrasion, plus some increase in transparency” inPetronella’s background. Wyld noted that the background of Portrait of Philips Lucasz, which also
contains a curtain or some sort of fabric, is more thickly painted in contrast to Petronella’s. In Simon
Howell’s condition report from May 2018, he notes that the background “has become worn and thin overtime, possibly as a result of injudicious cleaning.” See condition report kept on file at The Leiden
Collection.
30. Portrait of Oopjen Coppit (fig 3) and its pendant, Portrait of Marten Soolmans, 1634 (Rijksmuseum,
Amsterdam / Musée du Louvre, Paris), contain a curtained background similar to that in Portrait ofPetronella Buys and Portrait of Philips Lucasz.
31. Comparable differences between pendant portraits are noted by Volker Manuth, “Portrait of a Man in a
Red Coat,” in The Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (New York, 2017),
https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/. Manuth notes that Rembrandt often painted male portraits in© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 14 of 24

a broader style, while taking a more delicate approach in the depiction of women. He cites the example
of Portrait of Dirck Jansz Pesser, 1634 (Los Angeles County Museum of Art) and Portrait of Haesje van
Cleyburg, 1634 (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum).
32. In Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6, Rembrandt’s Paintings
Revisited: A Complete Survey, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (Dordrecht, 2014),
524, Van de Wetering reattributed Portrait of a Young Woman to Rembrandt, explaining that the “highly
detailed and smooth execution” of the woman’s portrait, as well as her pendant, had been seen as“incompatible with the idea of Rembrandt’s manner of painting to which the RRP was committed at thetime.” Van de Wetering’s remarks allow for a broader and more varied understanding of Rembrandt’s
approach to portraiture, as well as between pendant portraits. When discussing the differences inRembrandt’s painting of the skin in the pendants Portrait of a Bearded Man in a Wide-Brimmed Hat,
1633 (Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena) and Portrait of a Forty-Year-Old Woman, possibly Marretje
Cornelisdr. Van Grotewal, 1634 (Speed Art Museum, Louisville), Van de Wetering writes: “differencesin the way of painting in a woman’s portrait compared with the man’s is not itself a decisive proof thatthe two paintings are not pendants.” See Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings,
vol. 6, Rembrandt’s Paintings Revisited: A Complete Survey, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 537, under nos. 73 and 74.
This broader framework should also be applied to the portraits of Petronella and Philips. The earlytwentieth-century Rembrandt scholar Jan Veth particularly admired the “graceful clarity” of Petronella’s
portrait, which he found to be “remarkable.” But he also commented that the portrait’s “dry” mannerprobably reflected the character of the sitter. “Dans le Portrait de Pétronelle Buys,—un Rembrandt quicette fois au moins est encore revenu d’Amérique,—on trouve un spécimen du talent de portraitistequ’avait acquis le maître pendant sa première période d’Amsterdam (daté 1635). L’œuvre paraît un peu
sèche ce qui s’explique en partie par le caractère du modèle, mais la gracieuse netteté de caractérisations
est remarquable, et, s’il fallait retrouver ce portrait parmi d’autres du même ordre exécutés par ses
contemporains, on en admirerait mieux encore la fine tenue. Combien ne serait-il pas souhaitable quel’œuvre pût rester dans le pays!” Jan Veth, “Rembrantiana,” L’Art flamand et hollandais (October 1906):
89.
33. As with Philips, Rembrandt smoothly blended the paint along the sitter’s hairline, and similarly renderedcertain details of the faces, such as the strong brown line that defines the mouth and the highlight on theupper eyelid.
34. Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6: Rembrandt’s Paintings Revisited: A
Complete Survey, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 6: 87a and 87b.
Oopjen is a full-length portrait on canvas, which Rembrandt would have approached differently than abust-length portrait on panel. Other portraits that share these stylistic qualities are Portrait of a Woman,
1633 (private collection), and Portrait of Maertgen van Bilderbeecq, 1633 (Städel Museum, Frankfurt).
Neither portrait was accepted as by Rembrandt in the Corpus.
35. See also note 47, where the Dutch art historian Frederick Schmidt-Degener described the painting as© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 15 of 24

having “une tonalité assez claire.” Frederick Schmidt-Degener, “Le troisième centenaire de Rembrandt
en Hollande,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906): 276.
36. In Petronella’s portrait, faint lines applied with a brush have been detected around the lids of the eyes,
the nostrils, and the outline of the lips. A thin black line is visible around Oopjen’s earring, as well as thecontours of her lips and nose. In Oopjen’s portrait, the medium has been identified as a “dilute, ivory
black paint.” See Petria Noble et al., “An Exceptional Commission: Conservation History, Treatment
and Painting Technique of Rembrandt’s Marten and Oopjen, 1634,” Rijksmuseum Bulletin 66, no. 4(2018): 330–31. The authors describe this technique of a painted sketch in Oopjen’s portrait as“undermodelling,” but also refer to it as “a thin black underdrawing.”
37. See Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3: 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), 3: A115, 175.
38. See Jaap van der Veen, “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business. Production and Trade between 1625 and
1655,” in Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Son: Art and Commerce from
Rembrandt to De Lairesse, 1625–1675 (Exh. cat. London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; Amsterdam,
Rembrandt House Museum) (Zwolle, 2006), 117–205. For further discussion on this period of theworkshop, see Ernst van de Wetering, “Problems of Apprenticeship and Studio Collaboration,” in Josua
Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 2: 1631–1634, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt
Research Project (The Hague, 1986),2: 45–90; Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Issues of Attribution in theRembrandt Workshop,” in Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century, NGA Online Editions(Washington, D.C., 2014), https://purl.org/nga/collection/catalogue/17th-century-dutch-paintings; andDavid DeWitt and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Portrait of Antonie Coopal,” in The Leiden Collection
Catalogue, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (New York, 2017), https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/.
39. See Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Issues of Attribution in the Rembrandt Workshop,” in Dutch Paintings oftheSeventeenthCentury,

NGA

OnlineEditions(Washington

D.C.,2014),

https://purl.org/nga/collection/catalogue/17th-century-dutch-paintings, and further discussion in note 45.
40. See the discussion in David DeWitt and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Portrait of Antonie Coopal,” in The
LeidenCollection

Catalogue,ed.

ArthurK.

Wheelock

Jr.

(New

York,

2017),

https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/; and Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol.
2: 1631–1634, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1986), 2: 62–63. The
latter indicates that the costume was typically done last in the painting of a portrait, and thus could havebeen done by an assistant after the sitter had left.
41. For Santvoort, see the discussion in Jaap van der Veen, “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business.
Production and Trade between 1625 and 1655,” in Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh& Son: Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De Lairesse 1625–1675 (Exh. cat. London, Dulwich
Picture Gallery; Amsterdam, Rembrandt House Museum) (Zwolle, 2006), 136–37. Isaac de Jouderville’s
presence in Amsterdam in the early 1630s is uncertain. Although his last documented training with
Rembrandt was November 1631, he may have continued to work with Rembrandt after he moved to
Amsterdam, possibly serving as his assistant in the workshop and traveling back and forth to Leiden. For© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 16 of 24

the various opinions about Jouderville’s role in Rembrandt’s workshop in Amsterdam, see Walter
Liedtke, “Rembrandt’s ‘Workshop’ Revisited,” Oud Holland 117, nos. 1–2 (2004): 56; Jaap van derVeen, “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business. Production and Trade between 1625 and 1655,” in Friso
Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Son: Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De
Lairesse 1625–1675 (Exh. cat. London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; Amsterdam, Rembrandt House
Museum) (Zwolle, 2006), 136; S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, De Jonge Rembrandt onder tijdgenoten:
Godsdienst en schilderkunst in Leiden en Amsterdam (Nijmegen, 2006), 199. See also, in this catalogue,
the biography of Jouderville: Piet Bakker, “Isaac de Jouderville”; as well as the entry David DeWitt andArthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Portrait of Antonie Coopal,” both in The Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed.
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (New York, 2017), https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/.
42. Neither Flinck, Backer, Santvoort, nor Jouderville has been put forth as the artist responsible for the
portraits of Petronella and Philips, and the RRP, as with many of its attributions, cites only “workshop
assistant.” The dates of Flinck and Backer’s arrival in Amsterdam are also not certain. Arnold
Houbraken wrote that Govert Flinck first went “met [with] Backer” to Amsterdam. Backer’s firstcommission, the group portrait of the governesses of the Amsterdam Civic Orphanage, was delivered to
the Orphanage in December 1633, suggesting that the artists could have traveled together from
Leeuwarden to Amsterdam that year. However, Houbraken’s remark, “met Backer,” may also mean
“like Backer,” indicating that Flinck went to Amsterdam later, on his own. Houbraken also mentionedthat in his first period in Amsterdam, Flinck produced “some examples of his ability” before he went tostudy with Rembrandt for one year. As Margriet van Eikema Hommes has recently demonstrated, The
Blessing of Jacob (Museum Catharijneconvent, Utrecht) seems to be one of these paintings. Flinck took
over the leading role at Uylenburgh’s workshop when Rembrandt left in 1635, so Flinck must havestarted to study and work with Rembrandt in 1634. See Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der
Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, vol. 2 (Amsterdam, 1718–21; revised edition published in
The Hague, 1753; reprinted in Amsterdam, 1980), 19–20; Tom van der Molen, “Van Leeuwarden naar
Amsterdam. Govert Flinck, Jacob Backer en Saskia Uylenburgh,” in Rembrandt & Saskia. Liefde in de
Gouden Eeuw, ed. Marlies Stoter and Justus Lange (Exh. cat. Leeuwarden, Fries Museum) (Leeuwarden,
2018), 44.
43. One can well imagine, moreover, that Rembrandt, who was interested in exotic cultures, would havetaken a personal interest in Jacques Specx, Petronella Buys, and Philips Lucasz because of theexperiences that they had at sea and in Japan and Batavia. Specx was a well-known general, and his
return to Amsterdam from Batavia in July 1633 was announced in the newspaper. On this same fleet
also came Hansken, the only living elephant at that time in Europe—which Rembrandt saw and drew
several times during the following years. See Jan van Hilten, Courante uyt Italien ende Duytschlandt, &c.,
Amsterdam, Lading van de retourvloor, nr. 29 (16 July 1633). Koninklijke Bibliotheek / National
Library of the Netherlands, The Hague. “Ladinghe van seven Oost-Indische Schepen, ses comende
van Batavia, ende een van Suratta, te weten: dese navolghende, Prins Willem, Hollandia, Zutphen,
AEmelia, Rotterdam, Hoorn, ende Ambonia, onder ‘t commandement van den Heer Generaqel Specx.
[…] Noch een levendighe wette Olyphant.” See also: Michiel Roscam Abbing, Rembrandts olifant. In© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 17 of 24

het spoor van Hansken (Leporello, 2016), 13–14.
44. It should be noted that the portrait was expressly identified as a work by Rembrandt when Specx
bequeathed it to Petronella’s niece in 1655. See discussion of Specx’s commission and inventories above.
45. See Albert Blankert, “Rembrandt, his Pupils and his Studio,” in Rembrandt and His Age (Exh. cat.
National Museum, Stockholm, 1992–93) (Stockholm, 1992), 62.
46. The standard division of labor within workshop practice is commonly understood as the sitter’s facebeing done (or blocked in) by the master and the costume or collar being done by an assistant or pupil.
Van de Wetering has also proposed a different workshop scenario, in which the master and an assistantmight work simultaneously on a pendant portrait commission. This scenario suggests that Rembrandt
would paint one part of a couple and an assistant the other. In the case of Petronella and Philips, Van deWetering has suggested that the pendants were executed in this manner, and that since Petronella’s ruff
is such a specific aspect of the portrait, Rembrandt may have touched up parts of it. Van de Wetering
mentions comparable practices in Portrait of a Man in a Broad-Brimmed Hat and Portrait of a Woman,both 1634 (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; for the woman’s portrait, see fig 5), and Portrait of a Man ina Slouch Hat and Bandoleer, 1635 (Kawamura Memorial Museum of Art, Sakura), and its pendant,
Portrait of a Woman, ca. 1635 (Cleveland Museum of Art). See Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus
of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6: Rembrandt’s Paintings Revisited: A Complete Survey, Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project (Dordrecht, 2014) 6: 118a–b; 133a–b.
47. “C’est une de ces belles et solides peintures pleines de distinction que Rembrandt, devenu le peintre dela haute société d’Amsterdam, exécuta de 1631 à 1636 environ. Le tableau est d’une tonalité assez claire,
qualité soulignée encore par la draperie gris perle qui sert de fond.” Frederick Schmidt-Degener, “Letroisième centenaire de Rembrandt en Hollande,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906): 276.

ProvenancePossibly commissioned by Jacques Specx (1588/89–1652), Amsterdam, the sitter’s brother-in-law, ca.
1635; by descent to his daughter, Maria de Gruijter (1636–1704), Amsterdam.
Cornelis Sebille Roos (1754–1820), Amsterdam (his sale, 28 August 1820, no. 85 [to Engelberts for 180
florins]).
Christiaan Everhard Vaillant (1746–1829) or Jacobus Sargenton (their sale, J. de Vries, Amsterdam, 19
April 1830, no. 74 [to Roos for 540 florins]).
[Cornelis François Roos (1802–74), Amsterdam, by 1836]
Adrian Hope, London (his sale, Christie’s, London, 30 June 1894, no. 56 [to C. Wertheimer for 1,300
guineas]).
[C. Sedelmeyer, Paris, 1894 (to M. Knoedler and Co.)].
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 18 of 24[M. Knoedler and Co., New York, November 1894 (to Joseph Jefferson)].
Joseph Jefferson (1829–1905), New York (his sale, The American Art Galleries, New York, 27 April
1906, no. 50 [to Kunsthandel A. Preyer for 20,600 dollars]).
[Kunsthandel A. Preyer, The Hague].
[F. Kleinberger Galleries, Paris, 1906].
August Cornelius de Ridder (1837–1911), Schönberg, Cronberg.
Michel van Gelder, Château Zeecrabbe, Uccle, by 1911.
[D. Katz, Dieren, 1938].
[Schaeffer Galleries, New York, by 1939].
André Meyer, New York, by 1962 (sale, Sotheby’s, New York, 22 October 1980, no. 12).
[Wildenstein & Co., New York, 1985 (to Commandant Paul Louis Weiller)].
Commandant Paul Louis Weiller (1893–1993), Geneva (sale, Christie’s, London, 7 December 2017, no.
10).
From whom acquired by the present owner in 2017..

Exhibition History
Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal, “Rembrandt-hulde te Leiden,” 15 July–15 September 1906, no.
49 [lent by Kunsthandel A. Preyer].
Amsterdam, Arti et Amicitae, “Tentoonstelling van de 16de en 17de eeuwsche Hollandsche en
Vlaamsche schilderijen: Waaronder van Rembrandt, Van Dijk, Jan Steen,” 7 May–4 June 1938, no. 67[lent by D. Katz].
Providence, Rhode Island Museum, “Dutch Painting in the Seventeenth Century,” December 1938–25
January 1939, no. 37.
New York, World’s Fair, “Masterpieces of Art,” May–October 1939, no. 16. [lent by Schaeffer
Galleries].
[Possibly] Amherst, Massachusetts, Morgan Gallery, Amherst College, “Exhibition of Netherlandish
Art,” 1941 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries].
New York, Portrait Painters’ Clearing House, “Woman’s Crowning Glory,” 10–22 November 1941, no.
8 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries].
Kalamazoo, Kalamazoo Institute of Arts, “17th Century Dutch Masterpieces,” 1942, no. 2 [lent by
Schaeffer Galleries].
[Possibly] New York, The Holland House, “Old Holland,” 1944 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries].
Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, “Frans Hals [and] Rembrandt,” 18 November–31© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 19 of 24

December 1947, no. 13 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries].
Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art, “Exhibition of the Collection of Mr. and Mrs. André
Meyer,” 9 June–8 July 1962 [lent by André Meyer].
Amsterdam, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, “A Special Visit,” 11 May–2 September 2018 [lent by thepresent owner].
Amsterdam, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, on loan with the permanent collection, September
2018–January 2019 [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 [lent by the present
owner].
Ottawa, National Gallery of Canada, “Rembrandt in Amsterdam: Creativity and Competition,” 16
July–6 September 2021, no. 61 [lent by the present owner].

References
Smith, John. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish and French
Painters. London, 1836, 7: 160, no. 497.
Vosmaer, Carel. Rembrandt, sa vie et ses oeuvre. 2nd edition. Paris, 1877, 580.
Von Bode, Wilhelm. Studien zur Geschichte der holländischen Malerei. Braunschweig, 1883, 405, 587,
no. 216.
Dutuit, Eugène. Tableaux et dessins de Rembrandt. Paris, 1885, 45, 62, 66, no. 272.
Von Wurzbach, Alfred. Rembrandt-Galerie. Stuttgart, 1886, 62, no. 200.
Michel, Émile. Rembrandt: His Life, His Work, and His Time. Translated by F. Simmonds, 2: 236. New
York, 1894.
Von Bode, Wilhelm, and Cornelis Hofstede de Groot. Rembrandt: Beschreibendes Verzeichniss seiner
Gemälde mit den heliographischen Nachbildungen: Geschichte seines Lebens und seiner Kunst. Paris, 1897,
2: 11, 115, 116, no. 118.
Sedelmeyer, Charles. Illustrated Catalogue of 300 Paintings by Old Masters of the Dutch, Flemish, Italian,
French, and English Schools being some of the principal pictures which have at various times formed partof the Sedelmeyer Gallery. Paris, 1898, no. 126.
Schmidt-Degener, Frederik. “Le troisième centenaire de Rembrandt.” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906):
276.
Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal. Rembrandt-hulde te Leiden: Catalogus der tentoonstelling van schilderijen
en teekeningen van Rembrandt en van schilderijen van andere Leidsche Meesters der Zeventiende Eeuw.
Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal. Leiden, 1906, 17, no. 49.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 20 of 24

Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal. Fêtes de Rembrandt à Leyde: Catalogue de l’exposition de tableaux et dedessins de Rembrandt et d’autres maîtres de Leyde, du dix-septième siècle. Exh. cat. Leiden, Stedelijk
Museum de Lakenhal. Leiden, 1906, 17, no. 49.
Veth, Jan. “Rembrandtiana: L’exposition en l’honneur de Rembrandt à la halle au drap de Leyde.” L’Art
flamande et hollandaise (October 1906): 89, ill.
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch Painters of
the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work of John Smith. Edited and translated by Edward G. Hawke, 6:
315–16, no. 661. London, 1916.
Rosenberg, Adolf. Rembrandt: des Meisters Gemälde. 3rd edition. Edited by Wilhelm R. Valentiner, 206,555. Stuttgart, 1908, 206,
Dumont-Wilden, Louis. La Collection Michel van Gelder au Château Zeecrabbe, Uccle. Brussels, 1911,
10–11.
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. “Rembrandts portretten van Philips Lucasse en Petronella Buys.” Oud
Holland 31, no. 5 (1913): 236–40.
Meldrum, David S. Rembrandt’s Paintings. New York, 1923, 189, no. 107.
Dumont-Wilden, Louis. La Collection Michel van Gelder au Château Zeecrabbe, Uccle. Brussels, 1934, 9,
20, no. 166.
Benesch, Otto. Rembrandt: Werk und Forschung. Vienna, 1935, 19–20.
Bredius, Abraham. The Paintings of Rembrandt. Vienna, 1936, 14, no. 349.
Arti et Amicitae. Tentoonstelling van de 16de en 17de eeuwsche Hollandsche en Vlaamsche schilderijen:
Waaronder van Rembrandt, Van Dijk, Jan Steen. Exh. cat. Amsterdam, Arti et Amicitae. Dieren, 1938,
20, no. 67.
Frankfurter, Alfred M. “17 Pictures of the XVII Century: Important Dutch Painting from Holland, aBenefit Show.” Art News (4 February 1938): 11, ill.
Stechow, Wolfgang. Dutch Painting in the 17th Century. Exh. cat. Providence, Rhode Island Museum.
Providence, 1938, no. 37.
Voren Kamp, Alphons P.A. “Masterpieces of Dutch Painting: An Important Exhibition at theProvidence Museum.” Art News (10 December 1938): 10, ill.
Frankfurter, Alfred M. Official Souvenir Guide and Picture Book: Masterpieces of Art: Exhibition at the
New York World’s Fair, 1939. Exh. cat. New York, World’s Fair. New York, 1939, no. 16.
Schaeffer Galleries. Dutch Painting: 17 Masterpieces in the 17th Century. Exh. cat. New York, Schaeffer
Galleries, New York, 1939, no. 11.
World’s Fair. Illustrated Catalogue of an Exhibition Held on the Occasion of the New York World’s Fair,
1939. Exh. cat. New York, World’s Fair. New York, 1939, no. 16.
Frankfurter, Alfred M. Official Souvenir Guide and Picture Book: Masterpieces of Art: Exhibition at the
New York World’s Fair, 1939. Exh. cat. New York, World’s Fair. New York, 1939, no. 16.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 21 of 24

Portrait Painters’ Clearing House. Woman’s Crowning Glory. Exh. cat. New York, Portrait Painters’
Clearing House. New York, 1941, no. 8.
Kalamazoo Institute of Arts. 17th Century Dutch Masterpieces. Kalamazoo, Kalamazoo Institute of Arts.
Kalamazoo, 1942, no. 2.
Schaeffer Galleries. Old Master Paintings. Exh. cat. New York, Schaeffer Galleries. New York, 1945,
no. 16.
Valentiner, Wilhelm R. Loan Exhibition of Paintings by Frans Hals, Rembrandt. Exh. cat. Los Angeles,
Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Los Angeles, 1947, no. 13.
Van Eeghen, L.H. “De Portretten van Philips Lucas en Petronella Buys.” Maandblad Amstelodamum 43(1956): 116.
MacLaren, Neil. National Gallery Catalogues. The Dutch School 1600–1900. London, 1960, 1: 325–26,
under no. 850.
Marx, C.R. Rembrandt. Paris, 1960, 167–68, fig. 48.
National Gallery of Art. Exhibition of the Collection of Mr. and Mrs. André Meyer. Exh. cat.
Washington, D.C., National Gallery of Art. Washington, D.C., 1962, 11, 38.
Bauch, Kurt. Rembrandt: Gemälde. Berlin, 1966, no. 486, ill.
Arpino, Giovanni, and Paolo Lecaldano. L’opera pittorica completa di Rembrandt. Milan, 1969, 103, no.
167.
Coolhaas, Willem Philippus. Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht 141, thans ‘Van
Riebeeckhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor de culturele en econokmischebetrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika. Amsterdam, 1973, 54–55, 57, 61, 73.
Strauss, Walter L., and Marjon van der Meulen. The Rembrandt Documents. New York, 1979, 296–97,
no. 1653/5; 327, no. 1655/5; 329, ill.
Norton, Thomas E. 100 Years of Collecting in Amercia: The Story of Sotheby Parke Bernet. New York,
1984, 61.
Schwartz, Gary. Rembrandt, His Life, His Paintings: A New Biography with All Accessible Paintings
Illustrated in Colour. New York, 1985, 164, no. 162.
National Gallery. The National Gallery: Illustrated General Catalogue. 2nd revised edition. London,
1986, 514, under no. 850.
Bomford, David, ed. Art in the Making: Rembrandt. Exh. cat. London, National Gallery. London, 1988,
52, fig. 38.
Bruyn, Josua, et al. A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. Vol. 3, 1635–1642. Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project. The Hague, 1989, 31, 34, 178, 181–82, fig. 5, 695–98, no. C 111 (as byan assistant in Rembrandt’s workshop).
MacLaren, Neil, and Christopher Brown. National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900.
London, 1991, 1: 344–46, under no. 850, fig. 80.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 22 of 24

Slatkes, Leonard. Rembrandt: Catalogo completo dei dipinti. Florence, 1992, no. 135 (as by Rembrandt
and workshop).
Tümpel, Christian. Rembrandt: All Paintings in Colour. Antwerp, 1993, 418, no. 237.
Liedtke, Walter. “Reconstructing Rembrandt and His Circle: More on the Workshop Hypothesis.” In
Rembrandt, Rubens, and the Art of their Time: Recent Perspectives: Papers from The Pennsylvania State
University. Edited by Roland Fleischer and Susan C. Scott, 11: 42, 48n64. University Park, 1997.
Liedtke, Walter. “Rembrandt’s Workshop Revisited.” Oud Holland 117 (2004): 67.
Bomford, David, et al. Art in the Making: Rembrandt. London, 2006, 82, 85, 88n2, fig. 56.
Van der Veen, Jaap. “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business: Production and Trade between 1625 and1655.” In Uylenburgh & Son: Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De Lairesse, 1625–1675. Edited by
Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, 172n56. Exh. cat. London, Dulwich Picture Gallery;
Amsterdam Museum Het Rembrandthuis. Zwolle, 2006.
Van de Wetering, Ernst, et al. A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. Vol. 6, Rembrandt’s Paintings Revisited:
A Complete Survey. With the collaboration of Carin van Nes. Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project. Dordrecht, 2014, 217, 544, no. 132b (as seems to be painted largely by an assistant ofRembrandt).
Sluijter, Eric Jan. Rembrandt’s Rivals: History Painting in Amsterdam 1630–1650. OCULI: Studies in theArts of the Low Countries 14. Amsterdam, 2015, 29, 405n37.
Schrader, Stephanie. “Rembrandt and the Mughal Line: Artistic Inspiration in the Global City of
Amsterdam.” In Rembrandt and the Inspiration of India. Edited by Stephanie Schrader, 13. Exh. cat. Los
Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum. Los Angeles, 2018.
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, 18, 21; 29, 32. 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, 26, 29. 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
Dhabi. London, 2019, 54, 81–2, no. 19. [Exhibition catalogue also published in French and Arabic.]
Manuth, Volker, Marieke de Winkel, and Rudie van Leeuwen. Rembrandt. The Complete Paintings.
Cologne, 2019, 86, 94, 661, 662, no. 246.
Swan, Claudia. Rarities of These Lands. Art, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Dutch Republic. Princeton,
2021, 4.
© 2024 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 23 of 24

Hillegers, Jasper. “Rembrandt and the Amsterdam Art Market.” In Rembrandt in Amsterdam. Creativity
and Competition. Edited by Stephanie S. Dickey and Jochen Sander, 102, 114n28. Exh. cat. Ottawa,
National Gallery of Canada; Frankfurt am Main, Städel Museum. New Haven, 2021.
Dickey, Stephanie S. “Portraits of Prosperity.” In Rembrandt in Amsterdam. Creativity and Competition.
Edited by Stephanie S. Dickey and Jochen Sander, 153–54, 169, pl. 61. Exh. cat. Ottawa, National
Gallery of Canada; Frankfurt am Main, Städel Museum. New Haven, 2021.

Technical Summary
The support for the painting is an oval, wooden panel. It consists of a single board, presumed to be oak, witha vertical grain. The bottom of the oval is slightly flat, but there is no evidence that the shape of the panel
was ever altered.[1] A cradle was applied to the verso of the panel over 100 years ago.[2] The fixed, verticalcradle members and the panel’s verso are coated in wax.
The panel’s white ground is covered with a thin, transparent brown layer. Infrared photographs (captured at
700 to 900 nanometers) reveal a faint underdrawing around the lids of the eyes, nostrils, and lips.[3] The
underdrawing was likely made with a brush. X-radiographs show that the sitter’s ruff was originally smaller,
and that it was extended with broad and energetic brushstrokes.
The painting was executed with a mixture of glazes and opaque paint. The artist applied the paint mostly wetinto-wet in the face, smoothly blending the colors together. Highlights and accents were then added wet-overdry. The background was painted thinly, and reserves were left for the sitter’s hair and ruff. Rembrandt used
thin, dark brushstrokes to create the hair, allowing the warm, brown underlayer to show through. He left anarea in reserve for the white lace and pearls that surround the sitter’s hair. Similarly, the artist left a reserve inthe white ruff for the shadow of the sitter’s head.
The painting is signed and dated in dark paint in the lower left.[4]The painting was cleaned in 2017 and is in good condition. Small flake losses along the grain of the wood
panel have been inpainted. The varnish is clear and even.[5]Further technical information about this artwork is available in The Rembrandt Database.

Technical Summary Endnotes

1. Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak, members of the Rembrandt Research Project, suggested that the panel may
have been cut down from a rectangular shape into an oval in the latter part of the seventeenth century,
based on the portrait’s relationship to its pendant, Portrait of Philips Lucasz, 1635 (National Gallery,
London). The National Gallery’s panel has straight beveling on the back and along the bottom and sides,
indicating that it was cut down at one point. A thorough technical examination of the Leiden Collection
panel has not been possible due to cradling on the back and a wax coating. See further discussion in the© 2024 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 24 of 24

accompanying entry, note 16.
2. It is not clear when the cradle was affixed to the panel. The earliest inscription on one of the horizontal
cradle bars notes a date of 1914.
3. Infrared photographs were taken by Simon Howell.
4. The signature and date have not been analyzed, but, according to Simon Howell, they are slightly wornand have not been applied over paint losses or cracks. They appear to have been painted “at or aroundthe time of the portrait” (personal correspondence, February 2019).
5. This summary is based on examination reports by Simon Howell, R. M. S. Shepherd Associates, dated
14 May 2018, and Martin Wyld for Christie, Manson, and Wood, dated 24 August 2017.

© 2024 The Leiden Collection