© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 2 of 26

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Rembrandt van Rijn
(Leiden 1606 – 1669 Amsterdam)1635
oil on oval panel
79.5 x 59.3 cm
signed and dated at lower left: “Rembrandt·f.
1635?
RR-115

How to cite
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)” (2019). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue,
2nd ed. Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/portraitof-petronella-buys-1605-1670/ (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.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 3 of 26

In this engaging half-length portrait, Rembrandt captured the gentle
sensibility of the twenty-nine-year-old Petronella Buys.

[1]

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 widthof 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 silhouettedwith a lace-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
visible on the painting’s verso: “Ms. Petronella Buijs, his wife / after thismarried to Burgomaster Cardon.”[3] As Cornelis Hofstede de Groot

Fig 1. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portraitof Philip 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

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 the 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 returnedto 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 ascouncillor general extraordinary.[8] After Philips’s death at sea in 1641,
Petronella settled in the Netherlands.[9] She married Johan Cardon in

Fig 2. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portraitof a Woman, 1633, oil on panel, 63
x 48 cm, Herzog Anton UlrichMuseum Braunschweig,
Kunstmuseum des Landes
Niedersachsen, inv. no. GG233,
Fotonachweis: Museumsfotograf

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 thecollection 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 byRembrandt.”[11] An inventory of Specx’s collection taken two years earlier, on
13 January 1653, refers to “Twee conterfeytsels (two portraits),” which are© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 4 of 26

likely the same paintings.[12] The fact that Specx had bequeathed theportraits to Petronella’s niece when Petronella was still alive led I.H. vanEeghen to suggest that Specx either commissioned the portraits or received
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
the Netherlands in 1633, supports the former scenario.[14] He owned threeother paintings by Rembrandt from that period of the artist’s career; thesehave 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); and the Abduction of Europa, 1632 (LosAngeles, J. Paul Getty Museum).[15]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz, which had been together
ever since 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 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 the face of Philips Lucasz, while a

Fig 3. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portraitof Oopjen Coppit (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. SKC-1768

workshop assistant painted his costume and collar, as well as the entirety ofPetronella Buys’s portrait.[18] Among their criticisms of Petronella’s portrait
were the modeling of the face and the treatment of light and shadow, as wellas the handling of the lace in the diadem cap, ruff, and bib.[19] Ernst van deWetering also believes that a workshop assistant executed Petronella’s faceand large portions of her costume, although he has recently concluded that
Rembrandt executed her collar and ruff.[20]The opinions expressed by Bruyn and Haak about the pendant portraits ofPhilips Lucasz and Petronella Buys have been critically received by anumber of scholars, including Gary Schwartz, Christian Tümpel, and Walter
Liedtke.[21] The most extensive arguments for attributing the portraits to

Fig 4. Rembrandt van Rijn, detailof face of Portrait of Oopjen Coppit(1611–1689), 1634, oil on canvas,
207.5 x 132 cm, joint acquisitionby the Dutch State and the French
Republic, collection Rijksmuseum /collection Musée du Louvre, inv.
no. SK-C-1768

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 hand of a workshop assistant, and thatthe 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
under pressure.[24] Whether or not the factor of “speed” can account for thebravura of this technique, which is also evident in Petronella’s bib, thisinnovative “shorthand” approach is characteristic of Rembrandt’s lace in the
mid-1630s.[25] Here, as elsewhere, Rembrandt seems to have devised new© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 5 of 26

technical approaches for depicting changes 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 andshadow.
The stylistic and technical similarities in the portraits of Philips and Petronella
were particularly evident in 2017 when the two paintings were reunited in astudy session at the National Gallery in London.[27] The juxtaposition of thesetwo portraits reinforced the opinion that they had been executed by the same
hand.[28] Depicted before a grayish, draped background,[29] Philips Lucasz
and Petronella Buys make compelling pendants as they turn toward eachother with inner strength and personal conviction. Philips turns slightly awayfrom the light, which allows light and shade to model his features in a forcefuland expressive way. Petronella, who is set slightly further back from theFig 5. Rembrandt van Rijn, Portraitof a Young Woman, 1633, oil onwood, 65.3 × 48.8 cm, Museum ofFine Arts, Houston, The Museumof Fine Arts, Houston, Museum
purchase funded by Iabel B. andWallace S. Wilson, the Alice Pratt
Brown Museum Fund, Caroline
Weiss Law, Fayez Sarofim, theBlanton 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, andMr. and Mrs. Temple Webber inmemory of Caroline Weiss Law,
2004.3

picture plane, faces toward the light, which falls brightly and evenly acrossher face. Rembrandt used a cool palette with warm highlights in bothpaintings, and captured 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 as husband and wife by varying his pictorial vocabulary insubtle ways.[31] As Van de Wetering has explained when discussing
Rembrandt’s varied painting techniques in portraiture—here in relation to themaster’s pendant portraits of 1633 in Braunschweig (fig 2)—“the execution of
faces could vary from portrait to portrait” as a result of the “speed” requiredby the commission or other “demands” by the sitters.[32] These factors are
likewise relevant when considering the distinctive aspects of the portraits ofPetronella and Philips. Whereas Rembrandt depicted Philips’s face withgreat freedom, layering short, quick brushstrokes of pinks and yellows tocreate rich facial textures and a ruddy complexion, he rendered Petronella’s
features more delicately and carefully. He painted her face with smooth,
subtle brushstrokes of gray, brown, and ochre paints, while using a wet-intowet technique to convey her porcelain-like complexion. Flesh-coloredhighlights define the inner corners of her eyes, and strokes of reddish-pink
paint articulate the shadow on her nose.[33]The painting techniques Rembrandt used to model Petronella’s features arealso found in other female portraits that he executed in the first half of the1630s. The smooth brushwork is comparable, for example, to the stylistic© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 6 of 26

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 similar angle oflight 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 andupper cheeks. Underdrawing applied with a brush is faintly visible aroundboth Petronella and Oopjen’s nostrils and lips, indicating the degree of careRembrandt took in rendering his sitters.[36] Areas of underpainting andunderdrawing (in paint) are also present in Philips’s portrait, including in theright eyebrow and around the eyes.[37] These commonalities in techniquesituate Petronella comfortably within the framework of Rembrandt’s
portraiture in this period.
The differing opinions that continue to exist about the attributions of Portraitof Petronella Buys and Portrait of Philips Lucasz reflect uncertainties about
how the Rembrandt workshop functioned between 1631 and 1635 when hewas working for the art dealer Hendrick van Uylenburgh (1584/89–ca. 1660).
The workshop focused on the production of commissioned portraits, and it islikely that Rembrandt had pupils and assistants to help him meet the highlevel of demand.[38] In Dutch and Flemish portrait traditions it was notuncommon for a master to collaborate with an assistant in completing a
portrait, with the master painting the face and hands and the assistantexecuting the costume.[39] Rembrandt himself is believed to have worked inthis way on occasion.[40] Nevertheless, it is not certain who might haveassisted 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 the workshop, 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 masterin the early 1630s in Amsterdam.[41] Govaert Flinck (1615–60) and Jacob
Backer (1608–51), 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 the nature of the commission, as well as the relationships thatexisted between the artist and the sitters. As previously noted, Rembrandt
likely painted these portraits for Jacques Specx, who had already bought© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 7 of 26

three of Rembrandt’s history paintings in the early 1630s.[43] Specx was not
only an important patron of Rembrandt, he was also Petronella’s brother-inlaw.[44] Furthermore, he had served as a witness at the announcement 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 a commission to a famous and expensive artist,
would they not have cared whether the task was carried out by the master
himself or an assistant?”[45] Aside from the unlikelihood that a workshop
assistant painted the entirety of the painting, Van der Wetering’s proposalthat an assistant executed Petronella’s face and Rembrandt the ruff andcollar is contrary to the character of workshop collaboration.[46]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz are fascinating examples
of Rembrandt’s portrait production in the mid-1630s. The remarkable historyof these portraits and the distinctive and compelling manner with which theywerepaintedstrongly

supporttheir

attributiontoRembrandt.

Commemorating Petronella and Philips’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 theMuseum 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 highsociety, executed around 1631 to 1636.”[47]- Lara Yeager-Crasselt, with contributions by Leonore van Sloten,
2017© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 8 of 26

Endnotes

1. The Leiden Collection would like to acknowledge the contributions made by Leonore van
Sloten to this entry, 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 as1610, but the author 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 van de 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: “26Septemb. 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) andPortrait of a Woman Wearing a Gold Chain, 1634 (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston).
Petronella’s double collar is notable 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 thistransitional 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.” Theseventeenth-century inscription was likely covered in the early twentieth century when thepanel 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 von Bode published the portrait as depicting© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 9 of 26

Petronella Buys in his monograph on Rembrandt in 1897 (based on the inscription on its
verso), but Hofstede de Groot was the first to mention the inscription and determine theportrait’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, with a Study of His Life, vol. 2 (Paris, 1897), 11, 115–16, no. 118.
4. Petronella married her second husband, Johan Cardon (1603–1671) in January 1646. Seenote 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 notpossible 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 searchof a marriage candidate for Petronella. Specx held prominent roles in the V.O.C., having
established trade with 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 of Amboina (the Moluccas) from 1628 to 1631. In
1631 he was appointed as commissioner extraordinary of 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 their daughter, Françoise, in Batavia on 30
September 1635. The original marriage banns are located in the Stadsarchief 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
de Generael 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.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 10 of 26

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 those commanders who had successfully returned home with their merchant
fleets. The gold chains worn by Philips in the portrait—which would otherwise be an unusualpart 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 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 thatyear. Lucasz was buried in Batavia, see P.A. Leupe, Philip Lucasz., raad en directeurgeneraal 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 and Petronella, 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 eneconomische 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 and in Vlissingen on 23 December 1645. The actual date of their marriage in Vlissingencannot be traced, but it occurred sometime in January 1646. See Stadsarchief Amsterdam:
doop-, trouw- en begravenisregister nr. 462, p. 458, 21 December 1645: “Compareerdenvoor 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) and Aliceanneke
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 andserved 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 11 of 26‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daer een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor de culturele eneconomische 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 aº 1635 door Rembrandt.” Gemeentearchief, Amsterdam, Scheiding van deboedel van Jacques Specx, Records of the Notary Justus van de Ven, NA 114, fol. 269.
Excerpts from the inventory are published in 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 bySpecx,

under

nos.

17

and

18

(“Tweeconterfeytsels”).

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, 1973), 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 de culturele 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 en economische 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 purchasedby the National Gallery with the Peel collection in 1871. For the portrait of Petronella, seeProvenance. 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 12 of 26

beveling on the back, along the bottom and sides, indicating that it was cut down from arectangular shape. This evidence is supported by the abrupt end of the brushstrokes on theedge of 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 theplacement 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 lattercleaning, restorers determined that the paint covering the hand was not original and decided
to remove it. They considered the hand to be “clumsy and shapeless” and “so unsatisfactoryin appearance” that they decided to paint it out again. Considering that some of the 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 havepainted out the hand himself. The National Gallery authors maintain that the painting andsubsequent 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 iscurrently on view 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). Schade confirmed 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.
Although there is no evidence to indicate that Petronella’s panel was cut down or reduced insize, the authors of Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 3, 1635–1642,
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989), C111, suggest thather portrait may have also been originally 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 a pendant,
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 that the portraits may have been originally painted on rectangular panels, but weresurrounded 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 ofthese outstanding questions regarding Petronella’s panel; for discussion of the latter
possibility of a painted oval format, which has also been suggested for Rembrandt’s Portraitof a Man in a Red Coat, see Volker Manuth, “Portrait of a Man in a Red Coat,” in The Leiden
Collection

Catalogue,ed.

ArthurK.

Wheelock

Jr.

(New

York,

2017),

https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 13 of 26

17. See References.
18. In Corpus III, Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak expressed doubts over the execution of the lace ofPhilips’s collar, highlighting the “partly bold flicks and strokes in white and small lines anddots in grey and black,” that do not show “the proper balance between an interestingbrushwork and a convincing suggestion of a regular lace pattern, such as we are used toseeing in Rembrandt’s autograph lace collars from the years 1633 and 1634.” They similarly
doubted the execution of the gold chains and “the superficial 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 ofPetronella’s attribution, see C111.
19. Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak described what they considered the “uniformly opaque” quality inthe lit and shadowed parts of Petronella’s face and the “linear” and “insensitive” treatmentof her eyes. They were also critical of the costume, and described a “confused” rendering of
the lace in the diadem cap, the rim of 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 state that the working conditions in which thepainting was studied were not particularly good: “Examined [. . .] under moderate lighting, inthe frame and on the wall.” It is also mentioned that Bob Haak and Ernst van de Weteringviewed this painting in October 1971, but, according to Van de Wetering, he had not seen thepainting 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 signaturesfrom 1632, 1633, and 1634, they argue that the way in which the inscription “rises steeply tothe right and is placed hesitantly, does not make an authentic impression.” Van de Wetering
has remarked that Rembrandt typically placed his signatures on one work within a pair orgroup of paintings, making it uncommon—though not exceptional—to find signatures on bothpendants. 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 tobe “consistent with it being painted at or around the time of the portrait.” The signature anddate are slightly worn and the paint has not been applied over paint losses or cracks(personal correspondence with The Leiden Collection, 5 February 2019). In Neil MacLarenand 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 have been 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 14 of 26(Dordrecht, 2014), 6: 544, no. 132b, Van de Wetering attributes Petronella’s portrait to“Rembrandt and Workshop” but states in 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 (inverbal communication with Leonore van Sloten) that the rapid and virtuoso brushwork in theouter 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 andChristopher Brown, National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900, 2 vols.
(London, 1991), 1: no. 850; and David 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 in personal correspondence with The Leiden Collection that he hadseen 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 madethat “the assistant theory [for the collar of the Portrait of Philips Lucasz] is an attractive one,because it explains away the weaker passages that we are reluctant to attribute toRembrandt. It also explains the discontinuity where the flesh of Philips’ neck meets the collar:
the two were clearly painted in separate operations and superficially joined by a highlight andshadow afterwards. But this in itself does not exclude Rembrandt’s authorship of both parts,
especially if he painted under great pressure. It is our view that the whole collar is by his hand
and that it should be viewed as if painted in a kind of brilliant shorthand. It is difficult toimagine a worthy but pedestrian assistant supplying these flourishes to the lace: it is moreplausible 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 topof 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 Van 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 15 of 26

Heel, “Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Workshop of Hendrick Uylenburgh,” inStephanie 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 etal., 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 andPainting 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 andseen 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 ofPhilips at the National Gallery (in the mid-1980s). In personal correspondence with The
Leiden Collection, Brown expressed his opinion that both paintings are entirely byRembrandt.
28. Bart Cornelis, curator of Dutch and Flemish paintings at the National Gallery, kindly sharedphotos of this meeting with The Leiden Collection.
29. Differences exist in the relative opaqueness of the backgrounds of the two paintings. Martin
Wyld, who cleaned Petronella’s portrait before it was auctioned in 2017, stated in his
condition report for Christie’s that 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” in Petronella’s background. Wyld noted that thebackground 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 fromMay 2018, he notes that the background “has become worn and thin over time, possibly as aresult 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 of Petronella 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. (NewYork, 2017), https://leidenstage.wpengine.com/archive/. Manuth notes that Rembrandt often
painted male portraits in 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 (LosAngeles 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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 16 of 26

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 the time.” Van deWetering’s remarks allow for a broader and more varied understanding of Rembrandt’s
approach to portraiture, as well as between pendant portraits. When discussing thedifferences in Rembrandt’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-YearOld Woman, possibly Marretje Cornelisdr. Van Grotewal, 1634 (Speed Art Museum,Louisville), Van de Wetering writes: “differences in the way of painting in a woman’s portrait
compared with the man’s is not itself a decisive proof that the two paintings are notpendants.” 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
early twentieth-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” manner probably reflected the character of the sitter. “Dans le Portrait de
Pétronelle Buys,—un Rembrandt qui cette fois au moins est encore revenu d’Amérique,—on
trouve un spécimen du talent de portraitiste qu’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 passouhaitable que l’œuvre pût rester dans le pays!” Jan Veth, “Rembrantiana,” L’Art flamand ethollandais (October 1906): 89.
33. As with Philips, Rembrandt smoothly blended the paint along the sitter’s hairline, andsimilarly rendered certain details of the faces, such as the strong brown line that defines themouth and the highlight on the upper 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 a bust-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 thepainting as having “une tonalité assez claire.” Frederick Schmidt-Degener, “Le troisième
centenaire de Rembrandt en Hollande,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906): 276.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 17 of 26

36. In Petronella’s portrait, faint lines applied with a brush have been detected around the lids ofthe eyes, the nostrils, and the outline of the lips. A thin black line is visible around Oopjen’s
earring, as well as the contours 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 Tradebetween 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 the workshop, 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 the Rembrandt 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;

and

David

DeWitt and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Portrait of Antonie Coopal,” in The Leiden Collection
Catalogue,ed.

ArthurK.

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 of the Seventeenth Century, NGA Online Editions (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 Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed. Arthur K. 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 ofa portrait, and thus could have been 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

fromRembrandt

toDe

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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 18 of 26

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 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 der Veen, “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business. Production andTrade 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 and Arthur
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” toAmsterdam. Backer’s first commission, the group portrait of the governesses of the
Amsterdam Civic Orphanage, was delivered to the Orphanage in December 1633, suggestingthat 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 mentioned that in his first periodin Amsterdam, Flinck produced “some examples of his ability” before he went to study 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 have started 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 have taken a personal interest in Jacques Specx, Petronella Buys, and Philips Lucasz
because of the experiences that they had at sea and in Japan and Batavia. Specx was a wellknown general, and his return to Amsterdam from Batavia in July 1633 was announced in thenewspaper. On this same fleet also came Hansken, the only living elephant at that time in© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 19 of 26

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 deretourvloor, nr. 29 (16 July 1633). Koninklijke Bibliotheek / National Library of theNetherlands, 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 het spoor van Hansken (Leporello, 2016), 13–14.
44. It should be noted that the portrait was expressly identified as a work by Rembrandt whenSpecx 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 thesitter’s face being done (or blocked in) by the master and the costume or collar being doneby an assistant or pupil. Van de Wetering has also proposed a different workshop scenario, in
which the master and an assistant might 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 de Wetering has suggested thatthe pendants were executed in this manner, and that since Petronella’s ruff is such a specificaspect 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 in a Slouch Hat and Bandoleer, 1635 (Kawamura Memorial Museum of Art, Sakura), andits pendant, Portrait of a Woman, ca. 1635 (Cleveland Museum of Art). See Ernst van deWetering 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 de la 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 defond.”

FrederickSchmidt-Degener,“Le

troisième

centenairedeRembrandtenHollande,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906): 276.

Provenance© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 20 of 26

Possibly commissioned by the sitter’s brother-in-law, Jacques Specx (1588/89–1652),
around 1635; by descent to his daughter Maria de Gruijter, née Specx (1636–1704),
Amsterdam.
Cornelis Sebille Roos (1754–1820), Amsterdam (his sale, 28 August 1820, no. 85 [180 florins
to Engelberts]).
Christiaan Everhard Vaillant (1746–1829) or Jacobus Sargenton (sale, J. de Vries,
Amsterdam, 19 April 1830, no. 74 [540 florins to Roos]).
[Cornelis Francois Roos (1802–74), Amsterdam, 1836.]
Adrian Hope, London (his sale, Christie’s, London, 30 June 1894, no. 56 [1,300 gns. to
Weilheim]).
[C. Sedelmeyer, Paris, 1894 (to M. Knoedler and Co.).][M. Knoedler and Co., New York, November 1894 (to Jefferson).]Joseph Jefferson (1829–1905), New York, January 1895 (his sale, The American Art
Galleries, New York, 27 April 1906, no. 50 [to A. Preyer for $20,600]).
[A. Preyer, The Hague.][F. Kleinberger, Paris, 1906.]
August Cornelius de Ridder (1837–1911), Schönberg, near Cronberg, Frankfurt-am-Main.
Michel van Gelder, Château Zeecrabbe, Uccle, Brussels, by 1911.
[D. Katz, Dieren, 1938.][Schaeffer Galleries, New York, by 1939 until at least 1947.]
André Meyer, New York, by 1962 (Sotheby’s, New York, 22 October 1980, no. 12).
[Wildenstein, New York, 1985 (sold to Weiller).]
Commandant Paul Louis Weiller (1893–1993), Geneva (his sale and others, Christie’s,
London, 7 December 2017, no. 10).
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History
Leiden, Stedelijk Museum de Lakenhal, “Rembrandt-hulde te Leiden: catalogus dertentoonstelling van schilderijen en teekeningen van Rembrandt en van schilderijen vanandere Leidsche Meesters der Zeventiende Eeuw,” 15 July–15 September 1906, no. 49 [lentby 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
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 21 of 26

1938, no. 67.
Providence, Rhode Island Museum, “Dutch Painting in the Seventeenth Century,” December
1938–25 January 1939, no. 37.
New York, Schaeffer Galleries, “Dutch Painting: 17 Masterpieces in the 17th Century,” 3
February–15 March 1939, no. 11.
New York, World’s Fair, “Masterpieces of Art,” May–October 1939, 16.
[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.
New York, Schaeffer Galleries, “Old Master Paintings,” 1945, no. 16.
Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, “Frans Hals [and] Rembrandt,” 18
November–31 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 Meyer].
Amsterdam, Museum Het Rembrandthuis, “A Special Visit,” 11 May–2 September 2018 [lentby the present 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 from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre,” 14 February–18 May
2019 [lent by the present owner].

References
Smith, John. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish andFrench Painters. 9 vols. London, 1829–42, 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.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 22 of 26

Michel, Émile. Rembrandt: His Life, His Work, and His Time. Translated by F. Simmonds,
2: 236. 2 vols. New York, 1894. Originally published as Rembrandt, sa vie, son oeuvre et son
temps. Paris, 1893.
Von Bode, Wilhelm, and Cornelis Hofstede de Groot. Rembrandt: Beschreibendes
Verzeichniss seiner Gemälde mit den heliographischen Nachbildungen: Geschichte seines
Lebens und seiner Kunst. 8 vols. Paris, 1897–1906, 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 haveat various times formed part of 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. [Also published in French as Fêtes de Rembrandt à Leyde: Catalogue del’exposition de tableaux et de dessins de Rembrandt et d’autres maîtres de Leyde, du dixseptième siècle, 15 juillet–15 septembre 1906.]
Veth, Jan. “Rembrantiana.” L’Art flamande et hollandaise (October 1906): 89, illustrated.
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 translatedby Edward G. Hawke, 6: 315–16, no. 661. 8 vols. London, 1907–28. Originally published as
Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten höllandischen
Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28.
Rosenberg, Adolf. Rembrandt: des Meisters Gemälde. Edited by Wilhelm R. Valentiner.
Klassiker der Kunst in Gesamtausgaben. 3rd edition. Stuttgart, 1908, 206, 555, S. 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. Rembrandt. Gemälde. Vienna, 1935, under “Notes,” page 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, no. 67.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 23 of 26

Frankfurter, Alfred M. “17 Pictures of the XVII Century.” Art News (4 February 1938): 11,
illustrated.
Stechow, Wolfgang. Dutch Painting in the 17th Century. Exh. cat. Providence, Rhode Island
Museum. Providence, 1938, no. 67, illustrated.
Voren Kamp, A. P. A. “Masterpieces of Dutch Painting.” Art News (10 December 1938): 10,
illustrated.
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 YorkWorld’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.
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, KalamazooInstitute 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. 2 vols. London,
1960, 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, illustrated.
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© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 24 of 26

en econokmische betrekkingen 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, illustrated.
Schwartz, Gary. Rembrandt, His Life, His Paintings: A New Biography with All Accessible
Paintings Illustrated in Colour. New York, 1985, 164, no. 162. Originally publishedasRembrandt,

zijn

leven,

zijne

schilderijen:Einnieuwebiografie,

met

all

beschikbare schilderijen in kleur afgebeeld. Maarsen, 1985.
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 by an assistant in Rembrandt’s workshop).
MacLaren, Neil, and Christopher Brown. National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School
1600–1900. 2 vols. London, 1991, 1: 344–46, under no. 850, fig. 80.
Slatkes, Leonard. Rembrandt: Catalogo completo dei dipinti. Florence, 1992, no. 135 (as byRembrandt and workshop).
Tümpel, Christian. Rembrandt: All Paintings in Colour. Antwerp, 1993, 418, no. 237.
Originally published as Rembrandt: Mythos und Methode. Antwerp, 1986.
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 Volume XI. Edited by Roland Fleischer and Susan C.
Scott, 42, 48, n. 64. 11 vols. 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, and 88, note 2,
fig. 56.
Van der Veen, Jaap. “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art Business: Production and Trade between
1625 and 1655.” In Uylenburgh & Son: Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De Lairesse,
1625–1675. Edited by Friso Lammertse and Jaap van der Veen, 172, n. 156. 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 tobe painted largely by an assistant of Rembrandt).
Sluijter, Eric Jan. Rembrandt’s Rivals: History Painting in Amsterdam 1630–1650. OCULI:
Studies in the Arts of the Low Countries 14. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, 2015, 29, 405, n.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 25 of 26

37.
Schrader, Stephanie. “Rembrandt and the Mughal Line: Artistic Inspiration in the Global Cityof 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.
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.]
Yeager-Crasselt,

Lara.

“The

LeidenCollection

and

the

Dutch

GoldenAge.”

In Rembrandt, Vermeer and the 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.]
Manuth, Volker, Marieke de Winkel, and Rudie van Leeuwen. Rembrandt. The Complete
Paintings. Cologne, 2019, 86, 94, 661, 662, no. 246.

Technical Summary
The support for the painting is an oval, wooden panel. It consists of a single board, presumed tobe oak, with a vertical grain. The bottom of the oval is slightly flat, but there is no evidence that theshape of the panel was ever altered.[1] A cradle was applied to the verso of the panel over 100
years ago.[2] The fixed, vertical cradle 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 thesitter’s ruff was originally smaller, and that it was extended with broad and energeticbrushstrokes.
The painting was executed with a mixture of glazes and opaque paint. The artist applied the paintmostly wet-into-wet in the face, smoothly blending the colors together. Highlights and accentswere then added wet-over-dry. The background was painted thinly, and reserves were left for thesitter’s hair and ruff. Rembrandt used thin, dark brushstrokes to create the hair, allowing the© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 26 of 26

warm, brown underlayer to show through. He left an area in reserve for the white lace and pearls
that surround the sitter’s hair. Similarly, the artist left a reserve in the 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 thatthe panel may have been cut down from a rectangular shape into an oval in the latter part ofthe 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 bevelingon 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 tocradling on the back and a wax coating. See further discussion in the accompanying entry,
note 16.
2. It is not clear when the cradle was affixed to the panel. The earliest inscription on one of thehorizontal 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 areslightly worn and have not been applied over paint losses or cracks. They appear to havebeen painted “at or around the time of the portrait” (personal correspondence, February2019).
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.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection