Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel

ca. 1628–29

Attributed to Gerrit Dou

oil on panel
66.6 x 50.9 cm
GD-112Currently on view at: The National Museum ofChina, Beijing© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 2 of 17

How To Cite
Surh, Dominique. "Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel." In The Leiden Collection Catalogue. Edited by Arthur K.
Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017.
https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/.
This page is available on the site's Archive. PDF of every version of this page is available on the Archive,
and the Archive is managed by a permanent URL. Archival copies will never be deleted. New versions areadded only when a substantive change to the narrative occurs.

© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 3 of 17

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

Comparative Figures

seated before a large, stretched canvas on a wooden easel, his right arm
raised as though he is about to apply paint to his composition. The
horizontal shape and substantial scale of the canvas indicate that the
young artist is composing a history scene, the most difficult andprestigious in the hierarchy of painting genres. At the same time, his direct
gaze suggests that his scene incorporates some aspect of the real world,
one that implicitly involves us.
The studio scene offers a fascinating glimpse into an artist’s workshop.
One sees here that Dutch artists sat when they painted, and the way theyFig 1. Workshop of Rembrandt
van Rijn, possibly Gerrit Dou andGovaert Flinck, Parable of the
Hidden Treasure, ca. 1630,
Szépmüsézeti Múzeum,
Budapest, inv. 342

stretched their canvases on a wooden frame. The young artist has alsobrought to his studio a number of props appropriate for a history painting.
Some of these are in a large chest filled with costly vessels of silver andgold, exotic fabrics, and a heavy chain with a medallion, while on the floor
are a cuirass, plumed helmet or cabasset, and various patterned
textiles.[1] The large tome and horn are attributes associated with the museof history, Cleo. Also in the studio are wooden stretchers of different
shapes leaning against the back wall. The grisaille tronies of an old man
and woman tacked to the wall are the types of character studies artists
often painted in Leiden during the late 1620s and early 1630s.
This intriguing work, which is unsigned and undated, is characteristic ofpaintings created in Leiden around 1630, but much debate hassurrounded its attribution. It was once thought to have been executed by
Rembrandt van Rijn (1606–69), but that traditional assessment was

Fig 2. Attributed to Gerrit Dou, An
Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard
with an Arms Still Life, ca.
1630–35, oil on panel, 66 x 51
cm, Szépmüsézeti Múzeum,
Budapest, inv. 62.10

challenged in 1911 when Wilhelm Martin gave the painting to Rembrandt’s
pupil, Gerrit Dou. Martin dated it to the period of Dou’s apprenticeship with
Rembrandt from 1628 to 1631.[2] Subsequently, Kurt Bauch proposed that
Rembrandt retouched the work in critical areas, specifically the face of theartist.[3] Werner Sumowski, who initially accepted Bauch’s proposal,
eventuallyconcluded

that

Dou

made

the

variouscompositional

adjustments himself.[4]An attribution of the painting to Dou, however, convinced neither Richard
Hunnewell nor Ronni Baer. In 1983 Hunnewell suggested an alternative
attribution to Rembrandt’s close circle, or possibly, Willem de Poorter(1608–48),[5] while Baer, in 1990, characterized the still-life elements inthe painting as “superficially Dou-like” but noted that their “formulaic

Fig 3. Attributed to Gerrit Dou,
Artist at His Easel, ca. 1630–32,
oil on panel, 59 x 43.5 cm, Private
Collection, United Kingdom© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 4 of 17

highlights and . . . rough, broad handling . . . find no parallel in Dou’s
autograph work.”[6] Baer suggested that the painting was executed by thesame unidentified hand or hands as Parable of the Hidden Treasure in the
Szépművészeti Múzeum in Budapest (fig 1).[7] She also noted that thepainting is closely related to The Rest on the Flight into Egypt formerly in
Downton Castle. Both paintings have been considered collaborative works
in which Dou participated, but their attributions are uncertain.[8]In an unpublished essay from 2003, Bob van den Boogert defended theFig 4. Rembrandt van Rijn, Artist
in His Studio, ca. 1628–29, 24.8 x
31.7 cm, Museum of Fine Arts,
Boston, 38.1838

attribution of the painting to Dou. He argued that the painting is closely
associated in style and compositional organization with a painting in
Budapest: An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard with an Arms Still Life (fig2).[9] Although the Budapest painting is unsigned and undated and theattribution is debated, Van den Boogert believed that the young Dou
executed both paintings. Both panels have the same dimensions, include
comparable still-life elements, and share a similar layering of objects thatcreates a consistent approach to spatial recession. A recent examinationof the two works side by side revealed striking similarities in palette andcompositional approach, increasing the likelihood that the same artist
executed both works.[10] Whether or not that artist is Dou, however, isanother question.
The ongoing discussions regarding the attribution of this painting to Dou

Fig 5. Gerrit Dou, Self-Portrait,ca. 1645–46, oil on panel, 12.4 x
8.3 cm, Aetas Aurea Holding SA

relate to larger unresolved questions about the character of Dou’s early
paintings. Very little is known about Dou’s apprenticeship with Rembrandt,
and experts do not agree on the paintings he produced during thistime.[11] The problem of defining the nature of Dou’s early style isexacerbated by the fact that there are no dated paintings by Dou before
1637.
One of the central issues in assessing Dou’s early works is the nature ofhis painting technique. Baer, for example, believes that the young master
painted in a relatively smooth style, as is evident inArtist at His Easel (fig3).[12] Jørgen Wadum, on the other hand, believes that from the beginningof his career, even before he entered Rembrandt’s workshop, Dou
executed his works with fine, parallel hatchings.[13] Ernst van de Wetering
has discussed the didactic importance of imitation in studio practice andargues that it is to be expected that Dou’s early painting style would
closely resemble Rembrandt’s own.[14] The question then remains as to© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 5 of 17

whether the character of Dou’s early brushwork is identifiable as aconsistent, idiosyncratic feature, or whether Dou expanded his techniqueand experimented with brushwork during these years in Rembrandt’s
studio. The application of paint in the Leiden Collection painting isrelatively loose and thick, but until a clearer resolution of these divergent
views of Dou’s early manner of painting is achieved, it seems appropriate
to designate this work as “attributed to Gerrit Dou.”
Even though no firm attribution of this work can be made at the present
time, the pictorial influences that shaped the subject matter andcomposition of the Leiden Collection painting are readily evident and point
to an origin within Rembrandt’s close circle in Leiden. The cuirass andplumed helmet, for example, are similar to objects in the military still life in
the foreground of Rembrandt’s History Painting of 1626 in the
Lakenhal.[15] The oval grisaille sketches on the back wall of the studiorecall tronies and turbaned figures in drawings and prints by Rembrandt
and his fellow Leiden artist, Jan Lievens (1607–74).[16] The most striking
pictorial source for the Leiden Collection painting, however, isRembrandt’s Artist in His Studio , ca. 1628–29, in the Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston (fig 4).[17] Like Rembrandt’s work, the composition isorganized around a large painting on an easel turned away from theviewer, with a doorway on the right and a light source on the left. Similar,
as well, are the rustic wooden floorboards, crumbling plaster andorthogonally oblique wall in the middle of the room, which leave little doubtthat the Boston painting served as this painting’s direct prototype.
The identity of the artist sitting before the easel has been frequently
discussed, with scholars variously identifying the figure as either
Rembrandt or Dou.[18] Martin first cited the figure as an anonymous,generic artist, but later identified it as a portrait of Dou.[19] Indeed, theartist’s features—rounded cheeks, a mouth with a full upper lip at thecenter, cleft chin, and slightly upturned nose—are remarkably similar toDou’s Self-Portrait from ca. 1635 in the Cheltenham Art Gallery or anotherself-portrait from 1645 in the Kremer Collection (fig 5). Dou would havebeen around seventeen years old in 1630, when the Leiden Collection
painting was executed, which seems consistent with the age of the man inthis work.
The dating of the painting to ca. 1630 is also supported by© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 6 of 17

dendrochronological data, which indicates that the wood panel was readyfor priming by the middle of the 1620s.[20] The analysis provides further
evidence that the painting was executed within Rembrandt’s close circle:
the panel comes from the same tree as Rembrandt’sHead of an Old Man
in a Cap from ca. 1630, now in the Bader Collection.[21] This matchsuggests that the two wooden supports were obtained from the same
panel maker in Leiden, possibly acquired as part of a mutual workshop
consignment.[22]Based on the aforementioned evidence, it seems most reasonable toconclude that the present painting originated within Rembrandt’s
immediate circle in Leiden, most likely by Gerrit Dou, although there wereundoubtedly other artists in Leiden whose names have not been recorded
who worked in a similar style. Also supporting the notion of Dou’s
authorship is the characterization of the artist as a pictor doctus
surrounded by the objects of his profession. Here, the young but erudite
painter presents himself as a skilled and ambitious artist, which isconsistent with the presentation of Dou’s artistic persona in his later selfportraiture.[23] Although the complexities surrounding Dou’s early artistic
personality are such that a firm attribution of this work to the young mastercannot yet be made, ongoing research about the artist’s early career may
eventually determine that this painting holds an important place within his
artistic evolution.

-Dominique Surh

© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 7 of 17

Endnotes
1. Together, these objects have been interpreted as a vanitas still life and as an illustration of
the Hippocratic aphorism, “Ars longa, vita brevis” (“art endures but life is brief”). See J.
Richard Judson, “Artist in His Studio,” in Rembrandt after Three Hundred Years (Exh. cat.
The Art Institute of Chicago; The Minneapolis Institute of Arts; The Detroit Institute of Arts)(Chicago, 1969), 51–52, no. 36. The grouping of valuable objects and military attributes has
also been explained, albeit less convincingly, as a reference to the conflict that is caused by
the possession of gold. See Hans-Joachim Raupp, Untersuchungen zu Künstlerbildnis undKünsterdarstellung in den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert (Hildesheim, Zurich, and New
York, 1984), 170.
2. During the nineteenth century the painting was attributed to Rembrandt and was considereda self-portrait. See J. H. Carter, Catalogue of the High Legh Collection [ca. 1893], 52, no.
28. Martin would have seen the painting in 1911, when it appeared with Kleinberger
Galleries in Paris, prompting his decision to include it as an autograph work by Dou in the
French edition of his monograph on the artist published that year. See Wilhelm Martin,
Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre: Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et les marchaunds au
dix septième siècle (Paris, 1911), 173, no. 63. Hofstede de Groot also consideredArtist at
His Easel to be by Dou, even though his volume on Dou went to press before the painting
came on the market, see Hofstede de Groot’s archival files at the RKD-Nederlands Instituutvoor Kunstgeschiedenis, where GD-112 is listed under “Dou: Bekende Mannen,” which
reproduces the text copied from the 1893 High Legh Collection catalogue, and includes thenote: “Is een bekende Gerard Dou.”
3. Kurt Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit (Berlin, 1960), 221–23; Kurt Bauch,Rembrandt: Gemälde (Berlin, 1966), 29, A7. Kurt Bauch argued that the pentimenti along
the figure’s face and back were indications of workshop corrections made by Rembrandt. He
maintained that the confident modeling of the sitter’s face was by the same hand as theLaughing Self Portrait in the Rijksmuseum, then attributed to Rembrandt, and therefore
concluded that Rembrandt had executed this part of the painting. On the numerous changes
made during the painting phase, see the technical report by Joanna Dunn, on file, the Leiden
Collection, New York. Several changes were made during the process of painting, which arevisible to the naked eye in the upper layers of paint. These include the adjustments madealong the seated figure’s back and face (originally higher in the picture plane closer to thelevel of his lips, and along the right side of the trunk where a curved silhouette was replaced
by a rectangular edge. Other indistinct forms at the center left, located near the
representations of the canvas stretchers leaning against the back wall are more readily
visible through the X-radiograph, showing various silhouettes near the back wall that werelater covered over with paint by the artist, indicating that the composition was modified in the© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 8 of 17

background during the painting process.
4. Werner Sumowski, Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler, 6 vols. (Landau, 1983–95), 1:528, no.
261. On the interpretation of the changes as retouchings made by Rembrandt, Bauchcompared the face of the New York painting to the Rijksmuseum’s Laughing Self-Portrait
and argued that there is a strong similarity between the works, leading him to suggest thatthe face in the Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel was painted by Rembrandt. However, theattribution of Laughing Self Portrait was rejected from Rembrandt’s oeuvre in 1982, when
Lievens’s name was first proposed as its possible author. See Stichting Foundation
Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol. 1, 1625–1631, ed.
Josua Bruyn et al. (The Hague, Boston, and London, 1982), 629–33, C34; Stichting
Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 4, SelfPortraits, ed. Ernst van de Wetering (Dordrecht, 2005), 4:166–67. On Bauch’s comparisonof the Leiden Collection painting with the Rijkmuseum’s so-called Laughing Self-Portrait, see
Kurt Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit (Berlin, 1960), 221–23; Eduard Plietzsch,
Holländische und flämische Maler des 17. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1960), 37–38; Werner
Sumowski, “Rezension von: K. Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit (1960),”
Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 3–4 (1962): 209; and Horst Vey, Die Sammlung Henle Asdem grosen Jahrhundert der neiderländischen Malerei (Cologne, 1964), no. 10.
5. Hunnewell discussed the present work along with a group of seven unsigned, and four
spuriously signed paintings from the early 1630s representing the theme of the artist in his
studio that Martin or Van Hall had attributed to Dou. Because the group of paintings dates
from a period during which Dou’s development remains unclear, Hunnewell chose tocategorize them simply as an iconographic group needing further examination. R. W.
Hunnewell, “Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of the Artist,” 2 vols. (Ph.D. diss.,
Boston University, 1983), Appendix C (Listing of Rejected Self Portraits and Problematic
Works), 288, 291–92, no. 13.
6. I am grateful to Ronni Baer for sharing her reasons for doubting the painting’s attribution to
Dou during an examination in front of the painting in New York on 6 December 2013. Amongother aspects discussed, Baer does not find the handling of the pages of the manuscript in
the foreground, the modeling of the face, or the loose brushwork of the grisaille sketches tobe consistent with other works securely attributed to the artist. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings ofGerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), Catalogue C(Works of Rejected Attribution), 23, no. C 1.
7. I am grateful to Ildikó Ember, who has shared the result of Peter Klein’s dendrochronologicalanalysis of the Parable of the Hidden Treasure , which consists of three boards in which theyoungest tree ring was formed in 1616, 1602, and 1617, making its possible creation
plausible after 1636. On the Parable of the Hidden Treasure, see Agnes Czobor, Rembrandt
and His Circle in Hungarian Collections (Budapest, 1969), plates 9–10.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 9 of 17

8. For a discussion of the 1669 inventory that mentions Rest on the Flight attributed to Dou andFlinck, see Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., NewYork University, 1990), 20–24. The painting, formerly in Downton Castle, was initiallyregarded by the Rembrandt Research Project as originating from the later 1630s in Haarlem.
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol.
1, 1625–1631, ed. Josua Bruyn et al. (The Hague, 1982), 486, under C6; on theRest on the
Flight into Egypt, see Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of
Rembrandt Paintings. 5 vols. Edited by Josua Bruyn et al. (vols. 1–3) and Ernst van deWetering (vols. 4–5) (Dordrecht, 1982–2011), 1:483–87, C6; 2:848–53; 5:312, as by Gerard
Dou and Govaert Flinck. For a more recent discussion of Parable of the Hidden Treasurethat follows the attribution to Dou and Flinck, see Christiaan Vogelaar, “The Parable of the
Hidden Treasure,” in Rembrandt and the Dutch Golden Age (Exh. cat. Budapest,
Szépmüsézeti Múzeum) (Budapest, 2014), no. 89, 342–43.
9. For the unpublished essay from 2003 on the present painting, see Bob C. van den Boogert,“Gerrit Dou (Leiden 1613–1675), Self-Portrait of the Artist in His Studio ,” courtesy of Jack
Kilgore, copy kept on file, The Leiden Collection, New York. Regarding the painting in the
Szépmüsézeti Múzeum in Budapest as a work by Dou, see in Agnes Czobor,Rembrandt
and His Circle in Hungarian Collections (Budapest, 1969), pls. 18–19. Ronni Baer considers
this painting a work of uncertain attribution and has reserved final judgment on its attribution
to be determined upon firsthand examination. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou(1613–1675),” 3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), Catalogue B (Works of
Questionable Attribution), no. B1. See also Bob C. van den Boogert, “Gerard Dou (Leiden
1613–1675) (?), An Officer of the Leiden Civic Guard with an Arms Still Life , ca. 1630/35,”
in The Mystery of the Young Rembrandt , ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst van deWetering (Exh. cat. Kassel, Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister;
Amsterdam, Museum Het Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001) 336–39, no. 68.
10. I would like to thank Ildikó Ember and Júlia Tátrai for receiving GD-112 on loan at the
Szépmüsézeti Múzeum in the fall of 2014, and to Gerdien Verschoor for arranging a
discussion and examination session of the painting next to An Officer of the Leiden Civic
Guard with an Arms Still Life (inv. 62.10) on the occasion of a CODART Focus Study Day
devoted to “Rembrandt and the Dutch Golden Age” from 26–27 October 2014. Based on
this firsthand examination, I concluded that the two works could both be by the same hand,
despite some differences in the paint handling, especially in the faces of the figures. In thecase of the Budapest work, the possibility of overpainting around the face could account forthe differences in paint handling between this area and the rest of the painting. Forthcoming
technical investigation of the Budapest painting may lead to additional insight, particularly as
it relates to the present work.
11. In the first major museum show devoted to Dou in 2000, a number of paintings attributed to© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 10 of 17

Dou’s early period were presented, many of which had been attributed to the artist since thetime of Martin and endorsed, more recently, by either Baer or Sumowski. Baer’s inclusion in
the exhibition of a number of these early, unsigned paintings to Dou has received somecriticism from experts in the field. Ernst van de Wetering argued that “during the recent Dou
exhibition . . . the work of mediocre Dou disciples was presented as early work of Dou
himself.” Similarly, in a discussion about Dou’s painting technique, Jørgen Wadum states:“We feel that in this exhibition weak imitations were presented as early works by Dou.” Thecomplexity of the situation is evident in Van den Boogert’s assertion that the attribution of thepresent painting to Dou only makes sense if other attributed works are removed from Dou’s
early oeuvre. The four paintings that Van den Boogert argues should not be consideredautograph are: Artist at His Easel, ca. 1630–32 (fig. 3); Man Writing at an Easel , ca.
1631–32, oil on panel, 31.5 x 25 cm, formerly in the Ivor Collection, New York;Old Man
Lighting a Pipe, ca. 1635, oil on panel, 49 x 61.5 cm, formerly in a private collection,
England; and Old Woman Peeling Apples, ca. 1629–31, Staatliches Museen, Berlin. The
first three of these paintings were included in Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master
Painter in the Age of Rembrandt , ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat, Washington D.C.,
National Gallery of Art; London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; The Hague, Mauritshuis) (NewHaven, 2000–1), nos. 1, 3, 5. Cf. Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675),” 3
vols. (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), 9–33; Ernst van de Wetering, “Delimiting
Rembrandt’s Autograph Oeuvre—An Insoluble Problem?” in The Mystery of the Young
Rembrandt, ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst van de Wetering (Exh. cat. Kassel,
Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; Amsterdam, Museum Het
Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001), 63; Jørgen Wadum, “Dou Doesn’t Paint, Oh No,
He Juggles with His Brush: Gerrit Dou, a Rembrandtesque Fijnschilder,” ArtMatters 1(2002): 72; Bob C. van den Boogert, “Gerrit Dou (Leiden 1613–1675), Self-Portrait of theArtist in his Studio,” courtesy of Jack Kilgore, 2003, copy kept on file, The Leiden Collection,
New York.
12. Baer considers the paintings’ smooth handling and palette of cooler tonalities in aubergine,
violet, and blue, as well as the recurring motifs of the book, globe, and inkstand, to be
characteristic of Dou’s style around 1630–32. Ronni Baer, Gerrit Dou 1613–1675: Master
Painter in the Age of Rembrandt , ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. Washington D.C.,
National Gallery of Art; London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; The Hague, Mauritshuis)(Washington D.C., 2000), no. 1, 64–65; see also Ronni Baer, “The Paintings of Gerrit Dou(1613–1675),” 3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1990), no. 6.
13. Jørgen Wadum, “Dou Doesn’t Paint, Oh No, He Juggles with His Brush: Gerrit Dou, aRembrandtesque Fijnschilder,” ArtMatters 1 (2002): 62–77, esp. 73. On Dou’s formative
training, prior to his apprenticeship with Rembrandt, with the engraver Bartholomeus
Dolendo and the glass-painter Pieter Couwenhorn, see Piet Bakker’s biography on Dou in
the present catalogue.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 11 of 17

14. After leaving Rembrandt’s studio in 1631, Dou began to work independently and presumably
began to have pupils of his own, whose imitations, in turn, would closely resemble his own
style. Thus, it is possible that some signed and unsigned paintings from the early 1630s
were executed by Dou’s own pupils or early imitators. See Ernst van de Wetering “Delimiting
Rembrandt’s Autograph Oeuvre—An Insoluble Problem?” in The Mystery of the Young
Rembrandt, ed. Bernhard Schnackenburg and Ernst van de Wetering (Exh. cat. Kassel,
Staatliche Museen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister; Amsterdam, Museum Het
Rembrandthuis) (Wolfratshausen, 2001) 58–67.
15. Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol.
1, 1625–1631, ed. Josua Bruyn et al. (The Hague, Boston, and London, 1982), 104–13, A 6;
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol.
4, Self-Portraits, ed. Ernst van de Wetering (Dordrecht, 2005), 65, 178 (figs. 139 and 140),
179, 184; Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt
Paintings, vol. 5, Small-Scale History Paintings, ed. Ernst van de Wetering (Dordrecht,2011), 4, 7 (fig. 5), 57 (fig. 63), 105, 150, 151 (fig. 10), 191, 212.
16. The sketch on the right relates to Rembrandt’s Bust of an Old Man with a Turban , ca. 1627,
signed, oil in panel, 26.5 x 20 cm., Collection Fondation Aetas Aurea; see Stichting
Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 4, SelfPortraits, ed. Ernst van de Wetering (Dordrecht, 2005), 635–66. This relates to a previously
unrecorded drawing that recently appeared on the market and is only one of a small numberof drawings by Dou that survive. See Sotheby’s, London, 9 July 2014, lot 107: Gerrit Dou,A‘Tronie’ of an Oriental Gentleman , black chalk on vellum, signed GDOU (GD in monogram),
154 x 122 mm. On the fascination with Middle Eastern costume in Rembrandt’s work, see
Walter Liedtke, “Man in Oriental Costume,” in Dutch Paintings in the Metropolitan Museumof Art, 2 vols. (New Haven and London, 2007), 2:554–67, no. 142. The female figure in
profile also relates to Jan Lievens’s Old Woman in Half-Length Profile, Facing Left , in the
Maida and George Abrams Collection in Boston, from ca. 1628–30; see Gregory
Rubenstein, “Old Woman in Half-Length Profile, Facing Left,” in Jan Lievens: A Dutch
Master Rediscovered, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. (Exh. cat. Washington D.C., National
GalleryofArt;

Milwaukee,

MilwaukeeArt

Museum;Amsterdam,

MuseumHet

Rembrandthuis) (New Haven, 2008), 234, no. 96.
17. For an overview of the painting, see Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project,A
Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 1, 1625–1631, ed. Josua Bruyn et al. (The Hague,
Boston, and London, 1982), 208–13, A18.
18. Various scholars regarded the painting as a portrait of Rembrandt, an assertion that was first
put forward in 1893 when the painting was thought to be by Rembrandt, see J. H. Carter,
Catalogue of the High Legh Collection [ca. 1893], 52, no. 28; A Descriptive and Illustrated
Catalogue of 150 Paintings by Old Masters . . . from the Kleinberger Galleries (Paris,© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 12 of 171911), no. 16; L. Balet,“Die Sammlung Bachstitz,” Der Cicerone 13 (1921): 336–38; Horst
Vey, Die Sammlung Henle As dem grosen Jahrhundert der neiderländischen Malerei(Cologne, 1964), no. 10.
19. Martin identified the sitter in Self-Portrait (?) at an Easel as a generic painter in 1911, but hedescribed it in 1913 as a self-portrait of Dou. See Wilhelm Martin,Gerard Dou, sa vie et son
oeuvre: Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et les marchaunds au dix septième siècle (Paris,
1911), 173, no. 63; cf. Wilhelm Martin, Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde, Klassiker der
Kunst (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1913), 180, no. 13. More recently, the subject matter has been
identified as a portrait of Dou in an unpublished essay from 2003 by Bob C. van den
Boogert, “Gerrit Dou (Leiden 1613–1675), Self-Portrait of the Artist in His Studio ,” courtesyof Jack Kilgore, copy kept on file, the Leiden Collection, New York.
20. Peter Klein indicates that the youngest year ring was formed in one of two boards in the year
1613 (with the earliest possible felling dates as 1622/28/49) with production possible from1627 to 1637. See Peter Klein, “Report on the Dendrochronological Analysis of the Panel‘The Artist in the Studio’ (G. Dou),” dated 2009, unpublished report, kept on file, The Leiden
Collection. A second dendrochronologist, Ian Tyers, was engaged to provide an additional
analysis, which yielded some contradictory information. Tyers states that the youngest year
ring of GD-112, in 2 of 3 boards, was formed in 1609 (with the earliest possible felling date
1618/24/45) with production possible from 1622 to 1633. See Ian Tyers, “GD-112 Gerrit
Dou, An Artist in His Studio,” dated November 2010, unpublished report, kept on file, The
Leiden Collection.
21. The connection between the two panels is made by Peter Klein. Although once doubted by
the Rembrandt Research Project, Head of an Old Man in a Cap is now widely considered to
be an undisputed work by Rembrandt. Strong evidence for this is the print made after thepainting by Jan Gillisz. van Vliet. See David De Witt, The Bader Collection: Dutch andFlemish Paintings (Kingston, 2008) no. 161, 261–65; Stichting Foundation Rembrandt
Research Project, A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol. 1, 1625–1631, ed. Josua Bruyn etal. (The Hague, Boston, and London, 1982), 1, C22, 16, 43–44, 576–80. I would like tothank David De Witt for sharing Peter Klein’s unpublished dendrochronological report on thepainting, which states that the youngest year ring of the panel was formed in 1613, making aplausible creation date for the work ca. 1630.
22. For a discussion of the Leiden production of wood, panel makers and relevant bibliography,
see Dominique Surh, Ilona van Tuinen, and John Twilley, “Insights from Technical Analysis
on a Group of Paintings by Gerrit Dou in the Leiden Collection,”Journal of Historians ofNetherlandish Art 6, no. 1 (Winter, 2014).
23. R. W. Hunnewell, “Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of the Artist,” 2 vols. (Ph.D.
diss., Boston University, 1983), 1:24–84. Walter Liedtke, “Self-Portrait,” in Dutch Paintings
in the Metropolitan Museum of Art , 2 vols. (New Haven and London, 2007) 1:158–66, no.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 13 of 17

27.

ProvenancePossibly Count Joseph von Rechberg (1769–1833), Austria.
George Cornwall Legh, M. P. (1804–77), East Hall, High Legh, Knustford, Cheshire; bydescent to Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Martin Cornwall Legh (1839–1904).
Lindo S. Meyers, London; [Kleinberger Galeries, Paris, by 1911].
Fritz von Gans, Frankfurt-am-Main, by 1913; [K. W. Bachstitz, The Hague, by 1920, no. 29].
K. Henschel, Kassel, ca. 1924.
([Gustav Cramer, Berlin, 1938; K. Erasmus, Aerdenhout, 1938]; Christie’s, London, 24
February 1939, no. 37, as by Rembrandt [for £546 to Watson]).
Philippens, Amsterdam, ca. 1938–40.
[Schaeffer Galleries, New York, by 1948].
[F. H. Enneking, Amsterdam, 1958; Hans Max Cramer, The Hague, 1958].
Heinz Kisters (1912–77), Kreuzlingen, 1959 (to Günther and Anne Liese Henle).
Günther and Anne Liese Henle, Duisburg (his Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 3 December 1997,
no. 6, unsold; sale, Christie’s, London, 10 July 2002, no. 70; [Jack Kilgore & Co., New York;
Otto Naumann Ltd., New York, 2004]).
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History
Delft, Prinsenhof Museum, “Xe Oude Kunst- en Antiekbeurs,” 21 August–9 September 1958
[lent by F. H. Enneking, Amsterdam].
Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, “Die Sammlung Henle: Aus dem grossen Jahrhundert
der niederländischen Malerei,” 22 February–5 April 1964, no. 10 [lent by Günther and Anne
Liese Henle, Duisburg].
Art Institute of Chicago, “Rembrandt after Three Hundred Years,” 25 October–7 December
1969; Minneapolis Institute of Arts, 22 December 1969–1 February 1970; Detroit Institute ofArts, 24 February–5 April 1970, no. 36 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle, Duisburg].
The Hague, The Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, “Terugzien in bewondering / A
Collector’s Choice,” February–March 1982, no. 30 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle,© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 14 of 17

Duisburg].
Amsterdam, K. & V. Waterman Gallery, “The Impact of a Genius: Rembrandt, His Pupils andFollowers in the Seventeenth Century,” 22 April–17 May 1983; Groningen, Groninger
Museum, 20 May–30 June 1983, no. 14 [lent by Günther and Anne Liese Henle, Duisburg].
Norfolk, VA, Chrysler Museum of Art, on loan with the permanent collection, 2005–6 [lent by
the present owner].
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum of Art, on loan with the permanent collection, December 2009–
January 2011 [lent by the present owner].
Philadelphia Museum of Art, “Dutch Treat: A Glimpse of Holland’s Golden Age,” 11 October
2011–6 January 2012 [lent by the present owner].
Leiden, Lakenhal Museum, “Gerrit Dou: The Leiden Collection From New York,” 9March–31 August 2014 [lent by the present owner].
Budapest,

Szépművészeti

Museum,

on

loan

with

the

permanentcollection,

October–December 2014 [lent by the present owner].
Ithaca, Cornell University, Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art, “An Eye For Detail: Dutch
Painting From The Leiden Collection,” September 2014–May 2015 [lent by the present
owner].
Beijing, National Museum of China, “Rembrandt and His Time: Masterpieces from The
Leiden Collection,” 17 June–3 September 2017 [lent by the present owner].

References
Carter, Joseph H. Catalogue of the Collection of Paintings at High Legh Hall . [ca. 1893], 52,
no. 28, as a self-portrait by Rembrandt van Rijn.
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, sa vie et son oeuvre: Etude sur la peinture hollandaise et lesmarchaunds au dix septième siècle. Paris, 1911, 173, no. 63, as by Dou.
A Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue of 150 Paintings by Old Masters of the Dutch,
Flemish, German, Italian, Spanish and French Schools from the Kleinberger Galleries .
Sales cat. Kleinberger Galleries, New York and Paris. New York and Paris, 1911, no. 16, asprobably a portrait of Rembrandt by Dou.
Martin, Wilhelm. Gerard Dou, des Meisters Gemälde. Klassiker der Kunst. Stuttgart andBerlin, 1913, 180, no. 13, as a self-portrait by Dou.
Bachstitz Galerie. The Bachstitz Gallery. The Hague, 1920, 22, no. 29, as a portrait ofRembrandt by Dou.
Van Falke, Otto. The Bachstitz Gallery: Catalogue of Paintings and Tapestries . 3 vols.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 15 of 17

Berlin, 1921, 1: no. 34, as a portrait of Rembrandt by Dou.
Balet, Leo. “Die Sammlung Bachstitz.” Der Cicerone 13 (May 1921): 334, as a portrait ofRembrandt by Dou.
Bauch, Kurt. Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit . Berlin, 1960, 221-23, as a self-portrait byDou, retouched by Rembrandt.
Plietzsch, Eduard. Holländische und Flämische Maler des 17. Jahrhunderts . Leipzig, 1960,
37–38, as by Dou, retouched by Rembrandt.
Sumowski, Werner. “Rezension von: K. Bauch, Der frühe Rembrandt und seine Zeit (1960).”
Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 3–4 (1962): 209, as by Dou, retouched by Rembrandt.
Van Hall, H. Portretten van nederlandse beeldende kunstenaars/Portraits of Dutch Painters
and Other Artists of the Low Countries . Amsterdam, 1963, 81–82, no. 25, as by Dou,retouched by Rembrandt.
Vey, Horst. Die Sammlung Henle: Aus dem grossen Jahrhundert der neiderländischen
Malerei. Exh. cat. Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz Museum. Cologne, 1964, no. 10, as by Dou,possibly retouched by Rembrandt.
Bauch, Kurt. Rembrandt: Gemälde. Berlin, 1966, 29, A7, as by Dou, retouched by
Rembrandt.
Judson, J. Richard. “Artist in His Studio.” In Rembrandt After Three Hundred Years: An
Exhibition of Rembrandt and His Followers. Edited by Charles C. Cunningham, Egbert
Haverkap-Begemann, J. Richard Judson, and Anne-Marie Logan. Exh. cat. The Art Instituteof Chicago; The Minneapolis Institute of Arts; The Detroit Institute of Arts. Chicago, 1969,
51–52, no. 36, as by Dou, possibly retouched by another hand.
Eckardt, Götz. Selbstbildnisse niederländischer Maler des 17. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1971,
176, no. 22, as by Dou.
Van de Watering, Willem L., Cramer, Hans M., Hoogsteder, John and Nystad, S.Terugzienin bewondering: A Collector’s Choice . Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis. The Hague, 1982,
98–99, no. 30, as by Dou.
Sumowski, Werner. Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler. 6 vols. Landau and Pfalz, 1983–95,
1:528, 558, no. 261, as by Dou.
Blankert, Albert, Broos, Ben, Van de Wetering, Ernst, Jansen, Guido and Van de Watering,
Willem. The Impact of a Genius: Rembrandt, His Pupils and Followers in the SeventeenthCentury: Paintings from Museums and Private Collections . Exh. cat. Amsterdam, Waterman
Gallery; Groningen, Groninger Museum. Amsterdam, 1983, 118–19, no. 14, as by Dou.
Hunnewell, Richard W. Gerrit Dou’s Self Portraits and Depictions of the Artist . 2 vols. Ph.D.
diss. Boston University, 1983, 2:288, 291–92, no. 13, as Circle of Rembrandt van Rijn,
possibly Willem de Poorter.
Bruyn, Josua. “Review of Gemälde der Rembrandt-Schüler, I by W. Sumowski; J. A.
© 2017 The Leiden CollectionSelf-Portrait (?) at an Easel
Page 16 of 17

Backer; A. van Dijck.” Oud Holland 98, no. 3 (1984): 161, n. 26, as an uncertain attribution.
Raupp, Hans-Joachim. Untersuchungen zu Künstlerbildnis und Künsterdarstellung in den
Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert. 1984, 170, as by Dou.
Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project. A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings . 5
vols. Edited by Josua Bruyn et al. (vols. 1–3) and Ernst van de Wetering (vols. 4–5).
Dordrecht, 1982–2011, 2:33, no. 14.
Baer, Ronni. The Paintings of Gerrit Dou (1613–1675) . 3 vols. Ph.D. diss. New York
University, 1990, 1:23, 3: no. C1, as an uncertain attribution.
Van de Wetering, Ernst. Rembrandt: The Painter at Work. Amsterdam, 1997, 117, as byDou.
Brown, Christopher, Kelch, J. and Van Thiel, Pieter J. J. eds.Rembrandt: The Master and
His Workshop. 2 vols. Exh. cat. Berlin, Altes Museum; Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; London,
National Gallery, 1991, 1:94, as by Dou.
Kleinert, Katja and Tainturier, Cécile. “Schilders uit de verf: Leidse ateliervoorstellingen uit
de zeventiende eeuw.” De Zeventiende Eeuw 22 (2006): 114, no. 6, as by Dou.
Hirschfelder, Dagmar. “Training Piece and Sales Product: On the Functions of the Tronie in
Rembrandt’s Workshop.” In Rembrandt 2006: Essays. Edited by M. Roscam Abbing.
Leiden, 2006, 132, no. 9h, as attributed to Dou.
Surh, Dominique, Van Tuinen, Ilona and Twilley, John. “Insights from Technical Analysis on
a Group of Paintings by Gerrit Dou in the Leiden Collection.” Journal of Historians ofNetherlandish Art 6, no. 1 (Winter, 2014): n. 12, as School of Rembrandt, possibly Dou.

Technical Summary
The painting was executed on a wood panel. The panel is comprised of three vertically grained
and oriented oak boards of unequal size. The left plank is 21 cm wide, the center is 24 cm wide,
and the right is only 5.5 cm wide. The left plank could not be dated, but the center and rightplanks came from the same tree, which was felled after 1617.[1] There are no original bevels
because the panel has been thinned and cradled.
The panel was prepared with a thin, even, light-colored ground. The ground is radio-opaque,accentuating the wood grain in the X-radiographs. The paint was applied in thin, successive
layers of light over dark, with slight impasto in some areas. Infrared photography shows that thesitter was moved slightly to the right and his jaw was lowered slightly.[2] The jaw originally ended
at the present location of the sitter’s lips. An amorphous shape in the X-radiographs in the area
between the sitter’s back and the three canvases against the wall and brushwork unrelated to
the final composition in this area implies that there was a more significant compositional change.
The X-radiographs also show large areas of reserve remain around the trumpet, fabric, and the© 2017 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

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

scarf in the lower left corner, indicating further changes in these areas. It appears the trumpet
was also shifted to the right.
The panel remains in plane, but it has cracked along the vertical cradle members at the top andbottom of the panel. There is a fair amount of abrasion to the paint in the background, the sitter’srobe, the lid of the trunk, and the shadows of the sitter’s face, and along the right edge. The
painting was treated in 2002.

Technical Summary Endnotes

1. Ian Tyers, dendrochronological report, November 2010. Tyers states that the boards are
narrower than normal, leading him to surmise that they have been trimmed. Therefore hedoes not give a possible creation date for the panel. Dr Peter Klein, who analyzed the panel
on a separate occasion, does not comment on the width of the boards and suggests anearliest possible creation date of 1630 (see Peter Klein, dendrochronological report, 2010).
2. Infrared photography was taken by Annette Rupprecht at 780, 850, and 1000 nm.

© 2017 The Leiden Collection