Listen to this episode here
1 Introduction
In a recent 2024 publication, Volker Manuth and Marieke de Winkel summarized a much larger earlier book of all Rembrandt’s paitings. The booklet is called: ‘Rembrandt. The Complete Self-portraits’. In this episode I will discuss these self-portraits and more specifically Rembrandt’s impressive self-portrait of 1658. Rembrandt was 52 years old when he painted it. For over 100 years, it has hung in New York’s Frick Collection. Why did Henry Clay Frick buy it and what did he think of this portrait? What are the features of self-portraits and where do ‘tronies’ fit in? How is this type of portrait interpreted today? What do you notice just by taking a closer look at the self-portrait of 1658? And, what triggered me to use this self-portrait for the cover of the study which led to my book ‘Rembrandt’s Money’? Before we answer these questions, let’s go back more than 30 years.
2 New York City
It was a rather hot summer in 1991. I was staying in New York City as I had accepted an assignment to give a series of lectures over a period of ten days, three hours a day after office hours, to a group of Dutch attorneys. Indeed, my students were some 15 Dutch lawyers who were partners and associates of major law firms in the Netherlands and who were working at their offices in Manhattan. By the way, I was staying at the Dorset Hotel on West 54th Street. Some ten years later, I noticed that the building had become an extension of the Museum of Modern Art.
After completing my first week of lectures, I had the weekend off. My New York ‘students’ recommended that I visit an art museum called the Frick Collection where I could see two paintings by Rembrandt: the ‘Self-portrait’, signed and dated ‘Rembrandt 1658’, and ‘The Polish Rider’, painted around 1655. Walking from the museum to my hotel, I recall noticing thousands of people walking towards Central Park. In the hotel, you could watch a live broadcast on HBO television of Paul Simon’s Concert in the Park. Turns out, I had just missed a free live concert of Paul Simon – a legendary event!
So, the reason for me going to New York was ‘law’. ‘Law’? Yes, indeed ‘law’.
From 1992, in the Netherlands, nearly all areas of civil and commercial law were undergoing changes due to a major overhaul of the ‘ancient’, French law oriented, civil law system; a system that had been in effect in our country for over 150 years.
In 1992, the existing Dutch Civil Code regime (in effect since 1838) had been reworked, resulting in a ‘new’ Dutch Civil Code. These lawyers working in New York needed to grasp, like many Dutch lawyers in the Netherlands, these important new changes to Dutch law in areas such as contracts, tort, property, and security rights, as well as the effects of the changes in relation to general corporate law and insolvency law.
So, as I said, after completing my first week of lectures, on the recommendation of my New York ‘students’, I’d visited the Frick Collection where I did indeed see two paintings by Rembrandt: the 1658 ‘Self-portrait’ , signed and dated ‘Rembrandt 1658’, and ‘The Polish Rider’ of around 1655.
To cut a long story short, back home in the Netherlandssome two weeks later, what I remembered most about Rembrandt was not so much his works of art, but that he had gone bankrupt in 1656! He was 50 years old at the time. So that’s where my interest in Rembrandt was triggered and the relationship with the legal field of insolvency law that I have practised during 30 years. I became a lawyers in 1974, indeed 50 year ago. Since the early 1990s I worked as a consultant, as a judge at the Court of Appeal in The Hague, as an arbitrator, and for over 25 years as a professor of law, in Amsterdam as well as in Leiden.
3 Cover of the book
My book ‘Rembrandt’s Money’ was published in late 2021. The book’s subtitle is ‘The legal and financial life of an artist-entrepreneur in 17th century Holland’. Obviously, with my background as a lawyer, I present a different perspective to many people’s understanding of Rembrandt. My podcasts serve as a kind of second edition to my book. If you’d like to subscribe to these podcasts, please do so via the website www.rembrandtsmoney.com.
Although one shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, I’ve now explained the choice for my book’s cover which is part of Rembrandt’s self-portrait of 1658. The cover design, by the way, was done by Theun Okkerse, a graphic designer from Dordrecht, the city where I’ve lived since the mid-1980s.
4 Frick
As I already mentioned, the self-portrait of 1658 belongs to the Frick Collection. So, who is Frick? It is Henry Clay Frick. He was an American industrialist, financier, and art patron who lived from 1849 to 1919. The founder of a coke manufacturing company, he was also chairman of the Carnegie Steel Company and would later play a major role in the formation of the giant U.S. Steel Corporation. He built the historic neoclassical building that became known as the Frick Mansion (a landmark building in Manhattan on 1 East 70th Street). The building was closed in the early 2020s for renovation work. It will reopen early 2025.
Frick built up an extensive collection of old master paintings and fine furniture which he donated to the Frick Collection, an art museum. He acquired the self-portrait of Rembrandt we are discussing here in 1906, for the sum of £225,000.
Why did he buy this self-portrait? According to his only surviving daughter, Helen Clay Frick, her father remarked in the latter years of his life: ‘… if Icould be given the choice of different kinds of ability, I would prefer being a painter like Rembrandt than anything else’. Martha Frick Symington Sanger, a great-granddaughter of Frick, notes in her book (p. 57ff.): ‘Although this comment can be understood as Henry Clay Frick’s basic appreciation of the artist, perhaps he was also reacting to Rembrandt’s ability – in depicting his own deep-set eyes, ponderous brow, and protruding lower lip – to kindle Frick’s memory of the paradox of his own land-rich but cash-poor forebear, Abraham Overholt.’
Just a quick side note: any literature references given here can be found at www.rembrandtsmoney.com under ‘sources’ or as a refence at the end of the written text accompanying this podcast that is published on the same day as the podcast’s release.
This Abraham was Henry’s grandfather. Abraham was a child of Henry Oberholzer (Anglicized to ‘Overholt’), a German Mennonite farmer who had moved to Pennsylvania in 1800. His family came from the area of Germany which specialized in distilling ‘korn’, or rye whiskey, and Henry also continued the tradition. So, here is perhaps one explanation for buying a self-portrait: it evokes the facial characteristics of a person you know, in Frick’s case his Mennonite grandfather.
[John C. Johansen (1876-1964), Henry Clay Frick, 1943
©The Frick Collection]
5 Self-portraits as an art discipline
Self-portraits are a distinct genre in art and Rembrandt is one of the leaders in this particular category. He produced around 80 self-portraits, half of them paintings, the other half in the form of etchings and drawings. Larry Silver, a Professor Emeritus of Art History from Pennsylvania (Silver (2018), 173), has calculated that Rembrandt produced ‘fully 85 self-portraits’. Van der Beek, a Dutch painter and writer (Van der Beek (2020), 80), notes as self-portraits: 50 paintings, 32 etchings and 7 drawings.
Rembrandt’s output during his lifetime amounts to 314 etchings and around 350 paintings. This number, of course, is somewhat of a ‘moving target’. Every year we hear about a new discovery of a genuine Rembrandt or the denial of a hitherto accepted attribution to Rembrandt. So, in all, the number of self-portraits in relation to Rembrandt’s entire output fluctuates between, say, 12% and 15%.
Some of his depictions were a way to practise facial expressions, or how to draw hair, or paint the effects of light and shadow across a face. Others portray persons in a certain role, in special costumes, with hats and berets or with striking attributes. In his self-portraits, Rembrandt also portrays himself in various roles, ranging from beggar to soldier, from Oriental persons to the apostle Paul, from a contemporary artist to the Greek painter Zeuxis. One special category among these portraits is what are known as ‘tronies’. I explained more about these exaggerated or characteristic facial expressions in my podcast RM24014, ‘Studying with Rembrandt’.
6 The tale of the mirror
To produce a self-portrait in the 17th century, you needed a mirror. Nowadays, self-portraits can be painted based on a photograph of the person. Self-portraits are photographs from another time. In recent years, it’s been possible to create your own self-portrait by taking ‘selfies’ with a mobile phone. But 350 to 400 years ago, the main tool used by the creator of a self-portrait was a mirror.
We don’t know exactly when the 1658 self-portrait was produced. In these financially troubled times for Rembrandt (listen to my podcast RM24011, ‘Rembrandt’s insolvency’) the following story is interesting to recall. Had Rembrandt’s mirror been the central piece in an unfortunate accident that would be recorded two weeks later?
On 1 May 1658, two persons stated in a notarial deed that a large mirror in a black frame (‘seker groote spiegel met een swarte lijst’) had been placed on a person’s head [who the witness understood to have been the son of Rembrandt van Rijn, the painter] (‘[die hij verstaet geweest te sijn de soon van Rembrant van Rijn, schilder]’). One witness stated – and the notary recorded this in his deed – that he had heard that the person (with the mirror on his head) had walked across the Ruslants Bridge, warning those in his path. However, when he stepped off the bridge, the glass in the mirror had made a cracking, snapping noise; and when that person lifted the said mirror from his head with the assistance of someone else, he, the witness, saw that the mirror’s glass had broken into many pieces. But the witness testified that the person carrying the mirror had not fallen, or bumped against something. The mirror had cracked while he was walking and stepped off the Ruslants Bridge onto the street.
So, what was going on here? Over 100 years ago, Dr Abraham Bredius voiced his view about this incident involving a mirror. Bredius (1855-1946) was a great art connoisseur, archive researcher, publicist, collector and patron. The Bredius Museum in The Hague contains a large part of his art collection. Interestingly, Bredius submits that this recorded event can only lead to the conclusion that young Titus, 17 years old at the time, carrying the mirror on his head, had a small art shop where Rembrandt possibly also sold his prints. See Bredius (1899), 3ff.
Another possible explanation is that the Rusland (now written with a ‘d’) Bridge is just a few blocks away from Oudezijds Voorburgwal 300, the original location (from 1614) of the Amsterdam City Pawnshop (‘Stadsbank van Lening’). Maybe Titus wished to pawn the mirror, on Rembrandt’s behalf? Anyway, the broken mirror meant the end of Rembrandt’s production of self-portraits – at least, those made using this particular mirror!
[Amsterdam City Pawnshop. Gate on the Oudezijds Voorburgwal]
7 Rembrandt Research Project
A thorough analysis of Rembrandt’s work was developed and presented in the so-called Rembrandt Research Project (RRP). In 1968, awareness and understanding concerns about authenticity of his work led to the establishment of this Rembrandt Research Project. It was originally envisaged to last a decade, but the project eventually ran for 46 years. It finally came to an end in 2014 and by then approximately one-quarter of Rembrandt’s oeuvre had still not yet been investigated. The project stopped due to the retirement of Dutch art historian and connoisseur Ernst van de Wetering (1938-2021), then aged around 83 years old. The Rembrandt world lost a great Rembrandt admirer when he passed away on 11 august 2021.
The archives and documentation of the Rembrandt Research Project are available through the Netherlands Institute for Art History in The Hague (RKD). The Rembrandt Database builds on and supplements research from the project; see www.rembrandtdatabase.org.
The results of the Rembrandt Research Project have been published in six extensive volumes, known collectively as ‘A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings’. Volume IV covers the self-portraits and was published in 2005. After completing his 1658 self-portrait, Rembrandt would continue to paint until shortly before his death in October 1669. Three self-portraits are known which he worked on in the final year of his life.
8 Rembrandt and self-portraits
It is hardly surprising, Van de Wetering writes, that the examination of Rembrandt’s self-portraits should be so complex. We were, after all, tackling one of the most intriguing problems in the history of art. In 2005, Van de Wetering specified two questions:
1 Why did Rembrandt stand in front of a mirror so extraordinarily often in order to represent himself in numerous paintings and etchings as well as in a lesser number of drawings?; and
2 Why do problems of authenticity arise in such apparently personal works, and how are such problems to be resolved in the face of a virtual absence of any contemporary documents concerning Rembrandt’s self-portraits?
See Vol. IV, p. XXIII ff.
In 2005, Van de Wetering noted that it should be realized that until quite recently, the interpretation of Rembrandt’s work in front of the mirror knew little constraint: every art historian author felt free to follow his or her own imagination in that Rembrandt’s sequential self-portraits were private, intimate works, an idea which is still widely held. Van de Wetering refers to Bonafoux, whose earlier work was also cited by him.
Indeed, in 2019, Bonafoux (134), still holds the same view. He looks at the 1658 self-portrait and poses the question ‘do we recognize a bankrupt man who has seen all his property dispersed at auctions’? He believes that Rembrandt had been reading the Book of Job ‘over and over again for months’. At some moment Job (30:26), prostrate (gebroken, terneergeslagen, knielend), utters: ‘And when I waited for light, there came darkness’. But, Bonafoux submits, that’s not Rembrandt’s response. No, ‘Rembrandt responds that it is with these small droppings of colour on his palette, these small derisory [‘spottend, honend’] droppings, that it is up to him to reinvent the light. There is no question of abdicating [‘troonsafstand’], or not asserting [‘verdedigen’]) the power of painting.’
Back to 2005. Van de Wetering summarizes the common view of the painter’s ‘internal pressure’ which led to the idea that Rembrandt must have been preoccupied with his ‘self’ in a manner unique for painters in the age in which he lived. Van de Wetering presents what he calls an alternative view which he developed on the basis of circumstantial evidence from various sources. Rembrandt’s activities in front of the mirror should be seen in large measure in the context of a growing demand for ‘portraits of Rembrandt done by himself’ (‘contrefeitsel[s] van Rembrandt door hem selffs gedaen’), as self-portraits were referred to in the 17th century, the term ‘self-portrait’ only occurring much later. This market for self-portraits – or for portraits of artists produced otherwise – should be seen, according to Van de Wetering, in the context of a strongly developing interest in artists and their works in the 16th and 17th centuries by a select and steadily growing community of ‘art lovers’. This group’s interest was increasingly focused on particular painters and their specific style, whereas the actual subject matter of the painting was of secondary importance.
Rembrandt’s painted self-portraits should be seen as commodities, whether they were sold from stock or painted on commission. Van de Wetering’s main conclusion is that Rembrandt’s activity in this field, taken as a whole, should be considered the result of ‘external pressure’ rather than ‘internal pressure’, the latter being the majority view at the beginning of this century.
I must say that I’ve always been rather surprised by the ‘internal pressure’ view. To me, Rembrandt – like many other painters during this period – was not only an artist, but also an entrepreneur. So if you call commercial reasons ‘external pressure’, that’s something rather obvious as he wanted to sell his works, his creations.
On this subject, I will conclude with two observations. The first is that ‘internal’ does not have to exclude the idea of ‘external’. Intimate, well-considered emotions expressed in a painting do not rule out the fact that such paintings may sell well. And second, I merely note that Rembrandt delivered self-portraits over a period of close to 50 years. Van de Wetering’s view regarding external pressure may be too uniform. Following extensive research, James Hall, an art historian, published his book on the cultural history of self-portraits in 2015. He submits that many of the early self-portraits resemble a specifically inspired artist – in Rembrandt’s case with a remarkably imperfect and non-generic (broad nose, deep frown) physiognomy, and ears that stuck out. In 2020, a Dutch study revealed a hitherto unknown detail of Rembrandt’s face. He did indeed have decidedly protruding ears, see Van der Beek (2020) (a discovery by Jan van Driel, a Dutch (self-)portraitist). It is also possible that the very first self-portraits may even have been sold just by chance.
9 The function of self-portraits
Having addressed this shift in opinion about how to view Rembrandt’s self-portraits, these types of works are currently viewed far more in the light of their function. In the book by James Hall I just referred to, he submits that a self-portrait can be regarded in several ways: (i) as the creator’s business card; (ii) as a test of competence or a statement of experience; (iii) a ‘snapshot’, to be viewed in the perspective of time, i.e. an acquaintance face to face; and (iv) also an exercise in studying a development over a certain period.
When Rembrandt was 30 years old, in 1636, he had already made more than half of his total production of paintings and etches (Hall (2015), 10). As to self-portraiture, Rembrandt reached new heights, in quantity and quality, in diversity and in variety and periods covered, though his production was less between 1640 and 1652, Hall (2015), 151, notes.
Rembrandt’s main motive for self-portraits must have been the demand from customers and collectors, Büttner submits in his biography ‘Rembrandt – Licht und Schatte’ (Light and Shadow) from 2014 (Büttner (2014), 219). Büttner is a professor of art history from Stuttgart, Germany. He therefore builds on the view developed by Van de Wetering ten years earlier.
10 The 1658 self-portrait
Let’s now take a closer look at Rembrandt’s 1658 self-portrait. It’s generally regarded as an absolute masterpiece and is the largest and most impressive self-portrait he ever produced. Rembrandt painted it when he was 52 years old, at a time when he was facing great adversity. Two years before, he had applied for cessio bonorum – an insolvency measure in which a debtor hands over his estate to his creditors. He had been forced to sell his artwork, his belongings and even his house.
In the 1658 self-portrait, he depicted himself wearing old-fashioned, 16th-century clothing. Rembrandt thus imagines himself, according to Van de Wetering, as a celebrated painter from the past. A painter’s hat or palette is missing, but the shining gold fabric of Rembrandt’s cape was no random choice. As Van de Wetering explains, Rembrandt will undoubtedly have read in Karel van Mander’s well-known Painting-book (‘Schilder-Boeck’) from 1604 how famous 16th century painters such as Jan Gossaert and Lucas van Leyden, because of their high status, were dressed in gold-coloured robes. See also Manuth/Van der Winkel (2024), p. 140.
As I already mentioned, I first saw the 1658 self-portrait at the Frick Collection in 1991, where I also learned that the painter had gone ‘bankrupt’ in 1656. Studying the painting as an amateur, I saw a contemplating, older – although he was only in his early fifties in 1658 – potentate type of man, who did not look very welcoming, with rather odd oriental gear and a bulbous, potato-shaped nose, probably sitting on a sort of throne, presumably using his cane as a sceptre. He looks doughy and washed out, two Dutch authors observe (Zegeling en Pos (2017), 56). Crenshaw, in his well-known book about Rembrandt’s bankruptcy (Crenshaw (2006), 153ff.), submits that the portrait is Rembrandt’s triumphant response to his financial difficulties in 1656. Volker Manuth et al. reject this view as being not very convincing.
Van de Wetering is bewitched by the question: why did Rembrandt place himself in front of a mirror so extraordinarily often in order to represent himself in numerous paintings and etchings as well as in a lesser number of drawings? Van de Wetering believes that the Frick self-portrait belongs to the group of paintings regarded as unquestionably autographic, although its large format, the frontal aspect of the sitting figure and the prominence of Rembrandt’s costume are exceptional. This is the generally accepted view. In the large group of self-portraits produced by Rembrandt, this work is called exceptional due to its colour, the frontal self-conscious pose, the exotic clothing and the large format; see Manuth et al. (2019), 612.
Van de Wetering is also fascinated by Rembrandt depicting himself life-size, in three-quarter length and especially almost frontally. He sits with his legs wide apart and his arms resting on the arms of a chair. A brown cloak is also thrown around the shoulders, covering his left arm down to the wrist. The cloak hangs down on the left and a large fold obscures the arm of the chair. On his head, Rembrandt wears a broad, black cap with a scalloped edge and a brown headband.
The figure is set against a dark background. The light comes from the top left, so that the cap casts an irregular shadow over the left half of the forehead and the rear. The cane with the silver knob throws a shadow on the hand. Here, Van de Wetering is reminded of the much-quoted passage in Van Hoogstraten about the Night Watch where, in addition to praising the painting, he expresses the wish that Rembrandt ‘er meer lichts in onsteeken had’ (had added more light to it).
In October 2022, Hans van der Gaarden, a Dutch writer and narrator (see https://www.manvantaal.com/), also considered the portrait. He agrees with Van de Wetering. Despite his financial misery, or precisely because of it, Rembrandt portrays himself pontifically, in a golden robe, seated broadly on a throne. But, he wonders: is Rembrandt actually seated?
Van der Gaarden notices that below his left hand, which is loosely holding a painting stick, the left armrest of a chair can be seen. The right hand lies over a strange curl, which is certainly not parallel to the left armrest. It is probably a fold (‘vouw’; ‘plooi’) in the cloak that he turned over. That fold would then lie over the right armrest. And what about that right hand? Rembrandt painted with his right hand and for self-portraits he looked in the mirror. Then right is left. Would this explain why the painted right hand is depicted so much more powerfully than the painted left hand? Of course, he always had to get up or at least move and walk from the mirror to the canvas. He might still be able to fix his hand on the left, but on the right the hand was constantly moving.
Van der Gaarden continues his observations. The sleeve of the painted right hand (actually the left hand) is painted with beautiful, pronounced brush strokes and the back of the hand with shiny knuckles clearly stands out. Rembrandt portrays himself here as someone who is completely in control of the situation. Seven years later, in 1665, Rembrandt painted another self-portrait in which he ‘depicted’ his hand. As far as Van der Gaarden is concerned, this is a more honest self-portrait. It is the famous self-portrait with two circles. In this painting, Rembrandt doesn’t fill the canvas so much and his costume is somewhat simpler. But for Van der Gaarden, the most notable difference is in the hands. The right hand is now invisible and the left hand, which holds the palette, brushes and painting stick, is a blur.
Now: Is Rembrandt sitting or is he standing? I thought sitting for a painting was only the prerogative of a nobleman, a pope or a professor – in the days of Rembrandt that is! Or should we to go back to the original view of Frick, just looking at it and comparing a self-portrait to someone you know, without being bothered about whether he’s sitting or standing?
11 Or is Rembrandt looking at me?
One final view I’d like to present is that of Gary Schwartz, a well-known art historian now in his eighties. He’s an American, but has lived in the Netherlands for 40 or 50 years. In 2022, he published a story on his own website about his ten favourite Rembrandt self-portraits. Gary Schwartz has written extensively about Rembrandt and over the years I’ve drawn inspiration from his books, especially those published in the 1980s and 1990s.
He lists a ‘Top 10’ of Rembrandt self-portraits, putting in second place the self-portrait of 1658. It had made the greatest impression on him when he was studying art history at the New York University in the 1950s. Some 30 years on, he returned to the painting when he was writing the biography that was rather critical of Rembrandt’s character. He recalls that when he was observing the portrait again, Rembrandt spoke to him saying: ‘Back again Schwartz? I’ve seen your kind come and go but I’m here to stay and how!’ Schwartz adds that ‘Rembrandt puts me in my place, when it comes to making a mark on history.’
The story of Rembrandt talking is something that came to my mind when I was finalising my book, in autumn 2021. My graphic designer, Theun Okkerse, said to me: Rembrandt is looking at you! He’s asking: ‘And Wessels? What do you think about how I dealt with my legal and financial matters throughout my life?’
Today, I took another close look again. I gazed into Rembrandt’s eyes for a long time. Do I see a little nervous tic near his right cheek? Can I hear his breath? Are his eyelashes moving? He may have seen everything in life, but his beady eyes have a piercing look. What’s he looking at?
Every time I see the painting, I think back to that long, hot summer in New York City in 1991. The portrait is not only a self-portrait, but also a me-portrait. I’m looking at him. And, indeed, is he looking back at me?
That’s it for this time. Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoyed it.
If you’d like to learn more, do visit my website www.rembrandtsmoney.com.
With this impressive self-portrait, we were back in 1658. In the next episode, I’ll tell you more about the last years of Rembrandt’s professional life until his death in 1669. See you then!
References
References mentioned or cited are available through the sources provided on www.rembrandtsmoney.com.
Stephanie S. Dickey and Jochen Sander, Rembrandt in Amsterdam. Creativity and Competition, National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa/Städel Museum, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, distributed by Yale University Press, 2021-2022.
Volker Manuth and Marieke de Winkel, Rembrandt. The Complete Self-Portraits, Taschen 2024.
Martha Frick Symington Sanger, Henry Clay Frick. An Intimate Portrait, New York London Paris: Abbeville Press Publishers 1998. https://www.garyschwartzarthistorian.nl/401-my-ten-favorite-rembrandt-self-portraits/