© 2019 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).” In The Leiden Collection Catalogue.
Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York.
https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/ (accessed March 22, 2019).
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
are added only when a substantive change to the narrative occurs.

© 2019 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, issilhouetted with a lace-and-pearl-trimmed bonnet. A jeweled pendant isnestled 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,
Portrait of 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 ofPhilips, now in the National Gallery London (fig 1)—in 1635, some months
after the couple’s marriage in August 1634.[5] Philips and Petronella had
first met in Batavia, where she had traveled in 1629 with her sisters
Geertruyd (1613–77) and Maria Odilia (died 1636), as well as with Maria
Odilia’s husband, Jacques Specx (1588/89–1652).[6] Petronella and Philips
returned to the Netherlands in late 1633, and announced their marriage in
Amsterdam on 4 August 1634. The preacher Johannes Sylvius, a relativeof Rembrandt, married the couple three weeks later in the Nieuwe Kerk.[7]Shortly after Rembrandt completed their portraits in 1635, Petronella andPhilips left again for the Dutch East Indies on 2 May 1635; there, Philips
resumed his role as councillor general extraordinary.[8] After Philips’s deathat sea in 1641, Petronella settled in the Netherlands.[9] She married JohanFig 2. Rembrandt van Rijn,
Portrait of a Woman, 1633, oil on
panel, 63 x 48 cm, Herzog Anton
Ulrich-Museum Braunschweig,
Kunstmuseum des Landes
Niedersachsen, inv. no. GG233,
Fotonachweis: Museumsfotograf

Cardon in January 1646 and lived the remainder of her life in Vlissingen,where Cardon served twice as Burgomaster.[10]The portraits of Petronella and Philips are first documented in 1655 in 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 by Rembrandt.”[11] An inventory of Specx’s collection taken two years
earlier, on 13 January 1653, refers to “Twee conterfeytsels (two portraits),”© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

which are likely the same paintings.[12] The fact that Specx had bequeathed
the portraits to Petronella’s niece when Petronella was still alive led I.H. vanEeghen to suggest that Specx either commissioned the portraits orreceived them as gifts from the couple prior to their departure for
Batavia.[13] Specx’s patronage of Rembrandt in the first half of the 1630s,
following his return to the Netherlands in 1633, supports the former
scenario.[14] He owned three other paintings by Rembrandt from that periodof the artist’s career; these have been plausibly identified asChrist on the
Sea of Galilee, 1633 (formerly Boston, Isabella Stewart GardenerMuseum); The Apostle Paul in Prison , 1631 (Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie); andthe Abduction of Europa, 1632 (Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum).[15]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz, which had been
together ever since 1635, were separated sometime before the earlynineteenth 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 ofFig 3. Rembrandt van Rijn,
Portrait of Oopjen Coppit(1611–1689), 1634, oil oncanvas, 207.5 x 132 cm, joint
acquisition by the Dutch Stateand the French Republic,collection Rijksmuseum /collection Musée du Louvre, inv.
no. SK-C-1768

Philips Lucasz, while a workshop assistant painted his costume and collar,
as well as the entirety of Petronella Buys’s portrait.[18] Among theircriticisms of Petronella’s portrait were the modeling of the face and thetreatment of light and shadow, as well as the handling of the lace in thediadem cap, ruff, and bib.[19] Ernst van de Wetering also believes that aworkshop assistant executed Petronella’s face and large portions of her
costume, although he has recently concluded that Rembrandt executed hercollar 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, andWalter Liedtke.[21] The most extensive arguments for attributing theportraits to Rembrandt were made by David Bomford, Christopher Brown,

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

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 that the couple’s portraits were entirely by Rembrandt.[23]One of their central arguments in favor of an attribution for Philips Lucasz isthat Rembrandt used “a kind of brilliant shorthand” for the execution of his
collar—a technique, they explain, that the artist would have adopted whenworking under pressure.[24] Whether or not the factor of “speed” canaccount for the bravura of this technique, which is also evident inPetronella’s bib, this innovative “shorthand” approach is characteristic of© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Rembrandt’s lace in the mid-1630s.[25] Here, as elsewhere, Rembrandt
seems to have devised new technical approaches for depicting changes infashion by applying black paint over white with free and confident
brushstrokes.[26] Alive with energy, his paint creates a splendid threedimensional effect throughout Petronella’s ruff, as the individual segmentsof the lace respond to subtleties of light and shadow.
The stylistic and technical similarities in the portraits of Philips andPetronella were particularly evident in 2017 when the two paintings werereunited in a study session at the National Gallery in London.[27] The
juxtaposition of these two portraits reinforced the opinion that they had[28]

been executed by the same hand.
background,[29]

Depicted before a grayish, draped

Philips Lucasz and Petronella Buys make compelling

pendants as they turn toward each other with inner strength and personalconviction. Philips turns slightly away from the light, which allows light andshade to model his features in a forceful and expressive way. Petronella,
who is set slightly further back from the picture plane, faces toward thelight, which falls brightly and evenly across her face. Rembrandt used acool palette with warm highlights in both paintings, and captured the effects
of light rippling across the fabric in the background.[30]Rembrandt

portrayedthedistinctive

physicalappearancesandpersonalities of Philips and Petronella with great assurance, highlighting
their respective individualities as husband and wife by varying his pictorial
vocabulary in subtle ways.[31] As Van de Wetering has explained when
discussing Rembrandt’s varied painting techniques in portraiture—here in

Fig 5. Rembrandt van Rijn,
Portrait of a Young Woman,
1633, oil on wood, 65.3 × 48.8
cm, Museum of Fine Arts,
Houston, The Museum of Fine
Arts, Houston, Museum purchasefunded by Iabel B. and Wallace S.
Wilson, the Alice Pratt Brown
Museum Fund, Caroline Weiss
Law, Fayez Sarofim, the Blantonand Wareing families in honor of
Laura Lee Blanton, the Agnes
Cullen Arnold Endowment Fund,the Fondren Foundation, Houston
Endowment Inc., Mr. and Mrs.
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

relation to the master’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” required by the commission or other “demands” by thesitters.[32] These factors are likewise relevant when considering thedistinctive aspects of the portraits of Petronella and Philips. Whereas
Rembrandt depicted Philips’s face with great freedom, layering short, quick
brushstrokes of pinks and yellows to create rich facial textures and a ruddy
complexion, he rendered Petronella’s features more delicately andcarefully. He painted her face with smooth, subtle brushstrokes of gray,brown, and ochre paints, while using a wet-into-wet technique to convey
her porcelain-like complexion. Flesh-colored highlights define the innercorners 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

are also found in other female portraits that he executed in the first half ofthe 1630s. The smooth brushwork is comparable, for example, to thestylistic 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 of light falling over the figures in order to achieve clarity offorms.[35] He also used reddish-brown tones and flesh-colored highlights tomodel the eye sockets, reddish-pink highlights on the lips, and soft pinkson the chins and upper cheeks. Underdrawing applied with a brush is
faintly visible around both Petronella and Oopjen’s nostrils and lips,
indicating the degree of care Rembrandt took in rendering his sitters.[36]Areas of underpainting and underdrawing (in paint) are also present in
Philips’s portrait, including in the right eyebrow and around the eyes.[37]These commonalities in technique situate Petronella comfortably within theframework of Rembrandt’s portraiture in this period.
The differing opinions that continue to exist about the attributions ofPortraitof 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 is likely that Rembrandt had pupils and assistants to help him meetthe high level of demand.[38] In Dutch and Flemish portrait traditions it was
not uncommon 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 master in the early 1630s in Amsterdam.[41] Govaert Flinck(1615–60) and Jacob Backer (1608–51), on the other hand, were membersof 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 that© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

existed between the artist and the sitters. As previously noted, Rembrandt
likely painted these portraits for Jacques Specx, who had already bought
three of Rembrandt’s history paintings in the early 1630s.[43] Specx was
not only an important patron of Rembrandt, he was also Petronella’s
brother-in-law.[44] Furthermore, he had served as a witness at theannouncement of her marriage to Philips Lucasz. All of these factors makeit quite improbable that Rembrandt would have assigned a workshop
assistant to execute Petronella’s portrait. Relevant for this discussion is aquestion Albert Blankert posed about a patron’s expectations for acommissioned portrait: “When people gave such a commission to a famousand expensive artist, would they not have cared whether the task was
carried out by the master himself or an assistant?”[45] Aside from theunlikelihood that a workshop assistant painted the entirety of the painting,
Van der Wetering’s proposal that an assistant executed Petronella’s face
and Rembrandt the ruff and collar is contrary to the character of workshop
collaboration.[46]The portraits of Petronella Buys and Philips Lucasz are fascinating
examples of Rembrandt’s portrait production in the mid-1630s. The
remarkable history of these portraits and the distinctive and compellingmanner with which they were painted strongly support their attribution to
Rembrandt. Commemorating Petronella and Philips’s marriage andmarking Philips’s service to the V.O.C., the pendants would haveconstituted important additions to Jacques Specx’s admirable collection of
Rembrandt paintings. For Frederick Schmidt-Degener, who would later
become director of both the Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen and the
Rijksmuseum, Petronella’s portrait represented “one of those beautiful andstrong paintings full of distinction that Rembrandt, [who] became thepainter of Amsterdam’s high society, executed around 1631 to 1636.”[47]- Lara Yeager-Crasselt, with contributions by Leonore van Sloten
2019© 2019 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 theoriginal 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 Octoberof that year: “26 Septemb. 1670 / ’S morgens omtrent 4 uuren is overleden Petronella Buijs
huisvrouw van Hr. Johan Cardon, mijn behoud moeij. 3 octb. Begraven.”
2. For similar clothing and hair fashion, see, for example,Portrait of Oopjen Coppit (fig 3) 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 Petronellareflects this transitional period in women’s fashion. Rudi Ekkart kindly provided further
information about these collars in personal correspondence with Leonore van Sloten (dated
December 10, 2018).
3. “Jonckvr. Petronella Buijs: sijne Huijsvr. Naer dato getrout aen de Hr. Borgerm. Cardon .”The seventeenth-century inscription was likely covered in the early twentieth century when
the panel was cradled. As noted by Martin Wyld, a signature on one of the horizontal
crossbars of the cradle is dated 1914. Cornelis Hofstede de Groot transcribed theinscription 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

portrait as depicting 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 the portrait’s pendant. See Wilhelm von Bode and Cornelis Hofstede deGroot, 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 insearch of 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Specx served as witnesses to this announcement. See also Neil MacLaren and Christopher
Brown, National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900 , vol. 1 (London, 1991),
344–45n5. The actual marriage took place on 27 August of that year, in the Nieuwe Kerk:
Stadsarchief Amsterdam, inventarissen, toegangsnummer 5001, trouwregisters van dekerken, inv. no. 989, p. 492. Jaap van der Veen provided indispensable help in tracing thedate 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
unusual part of his dress—indicate his receipt of this award and constitute further evidence
for the 1635 dating of the painting. After he and Petronella left the Netherlands on 2 May
1635, they arrived in Batavia over four months later, on 20 September 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 etal., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt
Research Project (The Hague, 1989), 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 Vlissingen cannot be traced, but it occurred sometime in January 1646. See Stadsarchief
Amsterdam: doop-, trouw- en begravenisregister nr. 462, p. 458, 21 December 1645:“Compareerden voor Jan Michielz Blaew en mr Gerrit van Helmont Joan Cardon van
Vlissingen, burgemeester tot Vlissingen, out 42 Jaren, noch een moeder hebbende en
Pietronelle Buijs uyt sgravenhage, weduwe van Philip Lucas, woonende opde Keisergraft
verclarende 5 Jaer weduwe te zijn geweest.” Ron Roose (Gemeentearchief Middelburg)
and Aliceanneke Jacobsen (Infocentrum Zeeuws Archief, Middelburg) kindly provided
assistance with the archival research related to the announcements and marriage ofPetronella and Cardon.
© 2019 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 11 of 26

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 ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daer een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor deculturele en economische betrekkingen met Zuid-Afrika (Amsterdam, 1973), 63–64. See
also François Valentijn, Oud en niew Oost-Indiën, ed. S. Keijser, vol. 1 (1855), 127–28,
131, 425; vol. 2 (1856), 446, 450, 467, 470.
11. “Schilderijen toegevallen de dochter 2 d.º [contrefeijtsels] van den Hr. Placas salr en sijn
huijsvrouw 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 (“Twee conterfeytsels”). Gemeentearchief, Amsterdam,
Inventaris van Jacques Specx, Records of the Notary Pieter de Bary, NA 1698, fol. 869.
See also Willem Philippus Coolhaas, Het Huis ‘De Dubbele Arend’: Het huis Keizersgracht
141, thans ‘Van Riebeechkhuis’ genaamd, nu daar een halve eeuw gearbeid is voor deculturele 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 andpurchased by the National Gallery with the Peel collection in 1871. For the portrait ofPetronella, see Provenance. In Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol.
3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989),© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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 arectangle into its present oval shape, possibly as early as the seventeenth century. The oakpanel has straight beveling on the back, along the bottom and sides, indicating that it was
cut down from a rectangular shape. This evidence is supported by the abrupt end of thebrushstrokes on the edge of the panel and indications of the “crumbling termination of thepaint layer.” The National Gallery authors argue that the alteration of the panel may have
impacted the placement of the sitter’s left hand, which is no longer visible in the painting (itis visible in the X-ray). The hand was discovered during cleanings in 1941 and 1977; during
the latter cleaning, restorers determined that the paint covering the hand was not original
and decided to remove it. They considered the hand to be “clumsy and shapeless” and “sounsatisfactory in appearance” that they decided to paint it out again. Considering that someof the pigments used in the hand date from the seventeenth century, and that the colors in
the flesh tone are found in other works by Rembrandt from the 1630s, it is possible that theartist may have painted out the hand himself. The National Gallery authors maintain that thepainting and subsequent painting out of the hand “coincided with the reduction of the panel
to an oval.”
An aspect related to the shape of the paintings is the frame in which Philips’s portrait 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 reducedin size, 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 that her 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 fullinvestigation 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 bepaired with a pendant, it seems highly unlikely that the paintings would not have been
conceived and executed in the same format at the time of the commission. Anotherpossibility, suggested by Leonore van Sloten, is that the portraits may have been originally
painted on rectangular panels, but were surrounded by an oval “window,” a compositional
format that Rembrandt often followed (see Self-Portrait with Shaded Eyes, RR-110). The
panels may have been cut into an oval shape at a later time. Further technical research will
have to be conducted to resolve some of these outstanding questions regarding
Petronella’s panel; for discussion of the latter possibility of a painted oval format, which has© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

also been suggested for Rembrandt’s Portrait of a Man in a Red Coat , see Volker Manuth,“Portrait of a Man in a Red Coat,” in The Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed. Arthur K.
Wheelock Jr. (New York, 2017), https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/.
17. See References.
18. In Corpus III, Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak expressed doubts over the execution of the laceof Philips’s collar, highlighting the “partly bold flicks and strokes in white and small linesand dots 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 of Petronella’s attribution, see C111.
19. Josua Bruyn and Bob Haak described what they considered the “uniformly opaque” quality
in the lit and shadowed parts of Petronella’s face and the “linear” and “insensitive”
treatment of 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 etal., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol. 3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt
Research Project (The Hague, 1989), C111. Bruyn and Haak state that the working
conditions in which the painting was studied were not particularly good: “Examined [. . .]under moderate lighting, in the frame and on the wall.” It is also mentioned that Bob Haakand Ernst van de Wetering viewed this painting in October 1971, but, according to Van deWetering, he had not seen the painting in person until 2018.
Bruyn and Haak also expressed doubt about the authenticity of the signature in Petronella’s
portrait. Although they note that the diagonal line placed below the date occurs insignatures from 1632, 1633, and 1634, they argue that the way in which the inscription“rises steeply to the right and is placed hesitantly, does not make an authentic impression.”
Van de Wetering has remarked that Rembrandt typically placed his signatures on one workwithin a pair or group of paintings, making it uncommon—though not exceptional—to findsignatures on both pendants. Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings , vol.
3, 1635–1642, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1989),
695.
Simon Howell has noted from a visual inspection of the painting that the signature appears
to be “consistent with it being painted at or around the time of the portrait.” The signatureand date 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

Portrait of Petronella Buys (1605–1670)
Page 14 of 26

Philips Lucasz (“clearly genuine and not retouched”) may have been followed by an “f” asin the portrait of Petronella.
20. In Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6, Rembrandt’s
Paintings Revisited: A Complete Survey , Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 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 Rembrandthuisin 2018, the first time he had seen it in person, he revised his opinion. He has now
concluded (in verbal communication with Leonore van Sloten) that the rapid and virtuoso
brushwork in the outer part of the ruff is characteristic of Rembrandt’s hand.
21. Gary Schwartz, Rembrandt, His Life, His Paintings: A New Biography with All Accessible
Paintings Illustrated in Colour (New York, 1985), 164; Christian Tümpel, Rembrandt: All
Paintings in Colour (Antwerp, 1993), 67; Walter Liedtke, “Rembrandt’s Workshop
Revisited,” Oud Holland 117 (2004): 67.
22. These views were expressed in publications including David Bomford, ed.,Rembrandt: Artin the Making (Exh. cat. London, National Gallery) (London, 1988), 52–57; Neil MacLarenand Christopher Brown, National Gallery Catalogues: The Dutch School 1600–1900 , vol. 1(London, 1991), 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 anddiscussed Petronella only briefly in relation to her pendant. They did not directly refute thecriticisms of the Rembrandt Research Project. Christopher Brown, former chief curator at
the National Gallery, London, noted in personal correspondence with The Leiden Collectionthat he had seen the painting in the mid-1980s (with Wildenstein).
24. In David Bomford et al., Rembrandt: Art in the Making (London, 2006), 87, the point ismade that “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 toattribute to Rembrandt. It also explains the discontinuity where the flesh of Philips’ neckmeets the collar: the two were clearly painted in separate operations and superficiallyjoined by a highlight and shadow afterwards. But this in itself does not exclude
Rembrandt’s authorship of both parts, especially if he painted under great pressure. It is
our view that the whole collar is by his hand and that it should be viewed as if painted in akind of brilliant shorthand. It is difficult to imagine a worthy but pedestrian assistant
supplying these flourishes to the lace: it is more plausible to say that here is a great painterworking at speed, perhaps not trying very hard.”
25. In a recently published article on Portrait of Oopjen Coppit and Portrait of Marten
Soolmans, the authors argue that Rembrandt’s technique of painting bobbin lace by using
black on top of white is evidence of his extraordinary skill and inventiveness in the 1630s.
© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Rembrandt moved away from the more traditional method of painting lace with white on topof black at the same time as Frans Hals in the early 1630s. The two artists may haveencountered 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 Heel, “Rembrandt and Frans Hals Painting in the Workshop of Hendrick
Uylenburgh,” in Stephanie Dickey, ed., Rembrandt and His Circle: Insights andDiscoveries (Amsterdam, 2017), 17–43. For earlier discussions of Rembrandt’s painting of
lace,

see

Josua

Bruyn

et

al.,

A

CorpusofRembrandt

Paintings ,vol.

2, 1631–1634, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (The Hague, 1986),
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.” Inan email dated 5 December 2018, he explained that there might “be some very slightabrasion, plus some increase in transparency” in Petronella’s background. Wyld noted thatthe background of Portrait of Philips Lucasz, which also contains a curtain or some sort offabric, is more thickly painted in contrast to Petronella’s. In Simon Howell’s condition reportfrom May 2018, he notes that the background “has become worn and thin over time,possibly as a result of injudicious cleaning.” See condition report kept on file at The Leiden
Collection.
30. Portrait of Oopjen Coppit (fig 3) and its pendant, Portrait of Marten Soolmans, 1634
(Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam / Musée du Louvre, Paris), contain a curtained backgroundsimilar to that in Portrait of Petronella Buys and Portrait of Philips Lucasz.
31. Comparable differences between pendant portraits are noted by Volker Manuth, “Portrait ofa Man in a Red Coat,” in The Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.
(New York, 2017), https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/. Manuth notes that© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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 (Los Angeles County Museum of Art) and Portrait of Haesje van Cleyburg,
1634 (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum).
32. In Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 6, Rembrandt’s
Paintings Revisited: A Complete Survey , Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 524, Van de Wetering reattributed Portrait of a Young
Woman to Rembrandt, explaining that the “highly detailed and smooth execution” of thewoman’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 pendantsPortrait of a Bearded Man
in a Wide-Brimmed Hat, 1633 (Norton Simon Museum, Pasadena) and Portrait of a FortyYear-Old 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 “gracefulclarity” 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 lePortrait 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 cequi s’explique en partie par le caractère du modèle, mais la gracieuse netteté decaractérisations est remarquable, et, s’il fallait retrouver ce portrait parmi d’autres du mêmeordre exécutés par ses contemporains, on en admirerait mieux encore la fine tenue.
Combien ne serait-il pas souhaitable que l’œuvre pût rester dans le pays!” Jan Veth,“Rembrantiana,” L’Art flamand et hollandais (October 1906): 89.
33. As with Philips, Rembrandt smoothly blended the paint along the sitter’s hairline, 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), 87a and 87b. Oopjen is a full-length portrait on canvas, which© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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.
36. In Petronella’s portrait, faint lines applied with a brush have been detected around the lidsof the eyes, the nostrils, and the outline of the lips. A thin black line is visible aroundOopjen’s earring, as well as the contours of her lips and nose. In Oopjen’s portrait, themedium 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), 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), 45–90; Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Issues of Attribution in theRembrandt Workshop,” in Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century , NGA Online
Editions(Washington,

D.C.,2014),

https://purl.org/nga/collection/catalogue/17th-century-dutch-paintings; 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://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/.
39. See Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., “Issues of Attribution in the Rembrandt Workshop,” inDutch
Paintings of the Seventeenth Century , NGA Online Editions (Washington D.C., 2014),
https://purl.org/nga/collection/catalogue/17th-century-dutch-paintings,

andfurther

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://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/; and Josua Bruyn et al., A Corpus of© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Rembrandt Paintings, vol. 2, 1631–1634, Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research
Project (The Hague, 1986), 62–63. The latter indicates that the costume was typically done
last in the painting of a portrait, and thus could have been done by an assistant after thesitter had left.
41. For Santvoort, see the discussion in Jaap van der Veen, “Hendrick Uylenburgh’s Art
Business. Production and Trade between 1625 and 1655,” in Friso Lammertse and Jaap
van der Veen, Uylenburgh & Son: Art and Commerce from Rembrandt to De
Lairesse 1625–1675 (Exh. cat. London, Dulwich Picture Gallery; Amsterdam, Rembrandt
House Museum) (Zwolle, 2006), 136–37. Isaac de Jouderville’s presence in Amsterdam in
the early 1630s is uncertain. Although his last documented training with Rembrandt was
November 1631, he may have continued to work with Rembrandt after he moved to
Amsterdam, possibly serving as his assistant in the workshop and traveling back and forthto 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
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; 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 ofAntonie Coopal,” both in The Leiden Collection Catalogue, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.
(New York, 2017), https://www.theleidencollection.com/archive/.
42. Neither Flinck, Backer, Santvoort, nor Jouderville has been put forth as the artist
responsible for the portraits of Petronella and Philips, and the RRP, as with many of its
attributions, cites only “workshop assistant.” The dates of Flinck and Backer’s arrival in
Amsterdam are also not certain. Arnold Houbraken wrote that Govert Flinck first went “met[with] Backer” to Amsterdam. Backer’s first commission, the group portrait of thegovernesses of the Amsterdam Civic Orphanage, was delivered to the Orphanage inDecember 1633, suggesting that the artists could have traveled together from Leeuwarden
to Amsterdam that year. However, Houbraken’s remark, “met Backer,” may also mean “likeBacker,” indicating that Flinck went to Amsterdam later, on his own. Houbraken alsomentioned that in his first period in Amsterdam, Flinck produced “some examples of hisability” 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, vol. 2 (Amsterdam, 1718–21; rev. ed., The
Hague, 1753; reprint, 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 well-known general, and his return to Amsterdam from Batavia in July 1633 wasannounced in the newspaper. On this same fleet also came Hansken, the only living
elephant at that time in Europe—which Rembrandt saw and drew several times during thefollowing years. See Jan van Hilten, Courante uyt Italien ende Duytschlandt, &c.,
Amsterdam, Lading van de retourvloor , nr. 29 (16 July 1633). Koninklijke Bibliotheek /National Library of the Netherlands, The Hague. “Ladinghe van seven Oost-Indische
Schepen, ses comende van Batavia, ende een van Suratta, te weten: desenavolghende,

Prins

Willem,Hollandia,

Zutphen,AEmelia,

Rotterdam,

Hoorn, ende Ambonia, onder ‘t commandement van den Heer Generaqel Specx. […] Nocheen 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 andan assistant the other. In the case of Petronella and Philips, Van de Wetering has
suggested that the pendants were executed in this manner, and that since Petronella’s ruff
is such a specific aspect of the portrait, Rembrandt may have touched up parts of it. Van deWetering mentions comparable practices in Portrait of a Man in a Broad-Brimmed Hat andPortrait 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), and its pendant, Portrait of a Woman, ca. 1635
(Cleveland Museum of Art). See Ernst van de Wetering et al., A Corpus of Rembrandt
Paintings, vol. 6, Rembrandt’s Paintings Revisited: A Complete Survey , Stichting© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

Foundation Rembrandt Research Project (Dordrecht, 2014), 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
de fond.” Frederick Schmidt-Degener, “Le troisième centenaire de Rembrandt enHollande,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 36 (1906): 276.

ProvenancePossibly 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 [180florins 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.
© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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[lent by A. Preyer].
Amsterdam, Arti et Amicitae, “Tentoonstelling van de 16de en 17de eeuwsche Hollandsche
en Vlaamsche schilderijen: Waaronder van Rembrandt, Van Dijk, Jan Steen,” 7 May–4
June 1938, no. 67.
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
[lent by 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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.
Michel, Émile. Rembrandt: His Life, His Work, and His Time . Translated by F. Simmonds,
2: 236. 2 vols. New York, 1894. Originally published asRembrandt, sa vie, son oeuvre etson 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 whichhave at various times formed part of the Sedelmeyer Gallery. Paris, 1898, no. 126.
Schmidt-Degener, Frederik. “Le troisième centenaire de Rembrandt.” Gazette des BeauxArts 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 asFêtes 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 andtranslated by Edward G. Hawke, 6: 315–16, no. 661. 8 vols. London, 1907–28. OriginallypublishedasBeschreibendes

undkritisches

Verzeichnis

der

Werke

der

hervorragendsten höllandischen Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts . 10 vols. Esslingen andParis, 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© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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.
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.
© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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 cultureleen 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, and695–98, no. C111 (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 (asby Rembrandt 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. “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.
© 2019 The Leiden Collection

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

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 and 544, no. 132b,
illustrated (as seems to be 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.
37.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “The Leiden Collection and the Dutch Golden Age.” InThe 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 Leiden Collection and the Dutch Golden Age.” 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.]

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 thatthe shape of the panel was ever altered.[1] A cradle was applied to the verso of the panel over
100 years ago.[2] The fixed, 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 thatthe sitter’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 thepaint mostly wet-into-wet in the face, smoothly blending the colors together. Highlights andaccents were then added wet-over-dry. The background was painted thinly, and reserves wereleft for the sitter’s hair and ruff. Rembrandt used thin, dark brushstrokes to create the hair,© 2019 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

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

allowing the warm, brown underlayer to show through. He left an area in reserve for the whitelace 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]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 ofPhilips Lucasz, 1635 (National Gallery, London). The National Gallery’s panel has straightbeveling on the back and along the bottom and sides, indicating that it was cut down at one
point. A thorough technical examination of the Leiden Collection panel has not beenpossible due to cradling on the back and a wax coating. See further discussion in theaccompanying 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.

© 2019 The Leiden Collection