RM24023 – The women in Rembrandt’s life
Listen to this episode here
At least five women played a role in Rembrandt’s life and he had a love affair with three of them. First, with Saskia van Uylenburgh (1612-1642), whom he married. Second, after Saskia’s death, with Geertje Dircx (approx. 1610-1656) who was nanny to his son Titus. This relationship soon floundered and Rembrandt’s role in the acrimonious ending of their relationship was not one of his finest moments, to say the least. The third object of his affection was his final life partner Hendrickje Stoffels (1626-1663).
I’d like to talk about Hendrickje today. His relationship with the first two has already been the subject of two previous episodes of my podcast – podcast RM24006, with regard to Saskia, and podcast RM24009, which focused on Geertje Dircx.
Two other women I’d also like to highlight were family members – Rembrandt’s mother and the child Cornelia who was born from Rembrandt’s relationship with Hendrickje Stoffels. So, today the spotlight is on three women: his mother, Hendrickje and Cornelia.
1 Rembrandt’s mother
Rembrandt’s parents were Harmen Gerritsz. Van Rijn (1568-1630) and Neeltgen Willemsdr. Suytbrouck (1568-1640). They married in the Pieterskerk in Leiden on 8 October 1589. They had no fewer than ten children, the first two being sons Gerrit (?-1631) and Adriaen (1597-1652). Gerrit would become a miller and Adriaen a miller and a shoemaker. Their eighth child was Willem, who became a baker. Rembrandt, born in 1606, was their ninth child, and their tenth and last child was Elysabeth. One could say that Rembrandt was an ‘afterthought’, as his eldest brothers were nine or more years older.
Harmen’s family belonged to the Reformed Church, while Neeltgen’s family were Catholics. Father Harmen was buried on 27 April 1630, so when Rembrandt was 24 years of age. His mother Neeltgen died 10 years later, on 14 September 1640. Both father and mother were buried in the Pieterskerk in Leiden.
[Old man with black hat, ca. 1630-1631,
The Hague, Mauritshuis museum; Rembrandt’s father?]
[Rembrandts mother, 1628,
Amsterdam Rijksmuseum]
[Old woman reading a book (so-called prophetess Anna, 1631,
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; Rembrandt’s mother?]
In 1640, when Rembrandt was 34 years of age, his mother Neeltgen died. A number of notarial deeds provide a statement of her assets and liabilities, the partition of the estate, its apportionment and valuation as well as the settlement between the four surviving children. It follows from these documents that Rembrandt’s mother was rather wealthy.
The estate included seven small houses, half of a barley mill, a garden in ‘Soeterwoude’, just outside Leiden, two leases and three bonds – all in all totalling 11,184 guilders. The mill was allocated to Rembrandt’s oldest brother Adriaen and with the outstanding charges being 1,224 guilders, Rembrandt was to receive a share of 2,490 guilders. To get some idea of the value, this is close to 20% of the sum Rembrandt needed to purchase the house and studio in the Breestraat in Amsterdam the year before.
Though we don’t know much about his mother Neeltgen, we do know that she agreed to Rembrandt’s marriage to Saskia in 1634. However, she was not present at the ceremony in Friesland. After his mother’s death, Rembrandt would certainly have appreciated his share in the inheritance. In 1640 and 1641 he fell behind on his house payments. Nevertheless, this debt was mounting, so he must have spent mother’s money on other things.
2 Hendrickje Stoffels
From around 1648, Rembrandt lived together with Hendrickje Stoffelsdr. Jaegers (1626-1663). She was born in 1626 in Bredevoort, a small town in the eastern part of the present-day Netherlands and so she was 20 years younger than Rembrandt. They would remain together until 1663, when Hendrickje died at the age of 37. She was buried on 24 July 1663 in the Westerkerk in Amsterdam. Hendrickje Stoffels was the daughter of Sergeant Stoffel Jaegers and Mechtelt Lamberts. She ran Rembrandt’s household and became his new love after Rembrandt had ended his relationship with Geertje Dircx.
Hendrickje Stoffels was the youngest of Sergeant (Sgt.) Stoffel Jaegers’ four children. They came from the little town of Bredevoort (now known as Aalten) in what is today the eastern part of the province of Gelderland. Her older sister was Martina (Martijn), who was married to Jan Carstensz. Pleckenpoel (Jan Kerstensz Ploeckenpol) from Lichtenvoorde, a soldier in Captain (Capt.) S. Klinger’s company. Her brothers were Berent and Herman Jaegers, who served in the company of Capt. Ploos van Amstel, the former as a drummer. Several such private armies existed in those days.
Hendrickje’s father almost certainly died in July 1646, possibly as an unidentified victim of the explosion in the gunpowder tower of Bredevoort on 12 July 1646. In January 1647, her mother remarried and became the wife of Sergeant Jacob van Dorsten who was a widower with three young children. It is very likely that the sad event of her father’s death and the changed family situation prompted Hendrickje to leave Bredevoort. In 1647, she became the helper of soldier widow Geertje Dircx in Rembrandt’s household in Amsterdam.
Manuth et al. (2019), 366, write that after Hendrickje’s father died (in 1646) and her mother’s remarriage, Hendrickje, 21 years old, left for Amsterdam. Bredevoort was a garrison town. As already mentioned, her oldest sister’s husband and her two brothers served in various armies. Manuth et al. (2019), 366, report that just after Geertje Dircx had left Rembrandt’s house (June 1649), Rembrandt accompanied Hendrickje on a trip to Bredevoort.
Hendrickje played a significant role in the tumultuous separation of Rembrandt and Geertje Dircx. In October 1649, she testified to a notary about a conversation between Geertje and Rembrandt. She had heard that a financial compensation had been agreed between the two. According to this statement, Rembrandt would give Geertje 150 guilders at once and 60 guilders a year for the rest of her life on the condition that he would remain her sole heir by will. Geertje, however, disputed this statement. Still, the statement given to the notary by Hendrickje formed part of the basis for Rembrandt to get rid of Geertje.
[Vrouw bij een deuropening; Woman at a doorway
(Hendrickje?), 1656/1657, Gemäldegalerie Berlin]
Rembrandt and Hendrickje lived together as a couple though they were not married. Evidently, in the State of Holland in those days, a situation of unwedded cohabitation was at least noted by representatives of the Reformed Church. It is not known when the church came to discover this fact, but action was taken some five years after Rembrandt and Hendrickje had been together.
On 25 June 1654, the council of the Reformed Church deliberated on whether Hendrickje Stoffels had been living in fornication with Rembrandt the painter (in the Dutch language of the time: ‘in hoererij [heeft] verloopen met Rembrant de schilder’). If that was the case, she would be subject to certain ecclesiastical sanctions. She was summoned to appear before the council within eight days. Hendrickje at that time must have been pregnant with Rembrandt’s child. The child, a daughter named Cornelia, would be born a few days or weeks before 30 October 1654, the date of her baptism.
Church officials may have been provoked by the nude in Rembrandt’s painting ‘Batheseba with a letter from King David’ (1654). But the visible signs of her six-month pregnancy may also have played a role.
[Bathing woman (Hendrickje?),
1654, National Gallery London]
When Hendrickje failed to appear before the church’s governors on 2 July 1654, she was summoned again to appear 14 days later, on 16 July. On that date, as stated in the legal notice, Hendrickje Stoffels, residing in the Breestraat with Rembrandt the painter (‘woonende op de Breestraet tot Rembrant de schilder’), having acted like a whore (‘… haer verlopen hebbende in hoererij’) was summoned for the third time, but again she did not appear.
Finally, on 23 July 1654, Hendrickje Stoffels appeared before the church council and admitted to having committed fornication (‘hoererij’) with Rembrandt. She was admonished and banned from receiving communion (‘de tafel des Heren’). Three months after her conviction, Hendrickje gave birth to their daughter Cornelia.
In the literature, it has been suggested that the church’s censure of Hendrickje did cost Rembrandt the support and possibly the friendship of his admirer Jan Six. In 1655, Six married Margaretha Tulp, the daughter of Nicolaes Tulp who was a former client of Rembrandt in 1632. For more information on him, listen to podcast RM24005 (‘Guilds and Glamour’). It is known that Tulp was a strict Calvinist physician and burgomaster of Amsterdam. Jan Six’ first municipal appointment in 1656 as Commissioner of Marital Affairs may also have led him to distance himself from the artist who apparently did not take the morals of that time very seriously.
3 Cornelia
Rembrandt and Hendrickje would only have this one child, Cornelia. She was born in 1654 in Amsterdam and was baptized in the Oude Kerk. Her year of birth, however, may also have been 1652. The records are confusing.
One year after Rembrandt passed away in 1669, Hendrickje and Rembrandt’s daughter Cornelia van Rijn married Cornelis Suythoff. In 1670, the wedding banns between them were registered. Cornelis was a painter and a warder (‘cipier’). Based on the registration, Cornelia was 24 years old, had no parents still alive, and was living on the Rozengracht. The announcement relates to ‘Cornelia van Rijn from Amsterdam, 18 years old’, whose parents have died (‘ouders doot’), assisted by her guardian ‘Abram Franse’. If the date 1670 is correct, Cornelia must have been born in 1652. Giltaij (2019), 10ff, claims that Cornelia was probably born in 1651 or 1652.
4 Hendrickje and Titus’ art-dealing business
In my last podcast, RM24022 ‘The last year of Rembrandt’s professional life’, I explained that in the early 1660s, Rembrandt had entered a new period in his life. The difficult period of his insolvency was largely behind him. His wife – at least on paper – was the boss of a business that was founded in 1660 together with Titus. They were living on the Rozengracht, slightly more than 1000m to the west of the former Amsterdam City Hall. This is now the Royal Palace on Dam Square, but it was built in the 1640s and opened as Amsterdam’s town hall in 1655.
A few words about this art-dealing business. In December 1660, with retroactive effect to 1658, Hendrickje and Titus established and commenced an art-dealing business (a ‘compagnie’). It is a remarkable agreement between the two. The agreement contains several provisions: who the parties are, the duration of the contract, the ‘capital’ contributions, its agreed retroactive effect. What was the rationale behind the agreement and the purpose of this business set up by Hendrickje and Titus? Was it – avant la lettre – a phoenix company, i.e. a company that had risen from the ashes of the financial collapse of Rembrandt’s one-man business. A business, set up to trade seamlessly with professional activities similar to those in his former business? Perhaps it was in substance, but not in form. Having analysed the agreement, I think that most of the obligations in the contract, if subjected to court review, would not be found to be legally valid. I leave aside whether Rembrandt acting as a professional, was acting as a representative of this alleged company or just on his own behalf. I have found no documents that mentioned this ‘company’. Once again, as so often, facts and circumstances available from day-to-day life are too few, too incomplete or too fragmented to conclude that the wording of the document was lived up to either way – to the advantage or to the disadvantage of Rembrandt.
5 Hendrickje’s death
Having shared hearth and home for around 14 years, Hendrickje passed away in 1663, likely the victim of a plague epidemic. She had signed two legal documents – a witness statement and her will – marking them with a cross as she was most likely illiterate.
A will had been drafted, drawn up by notary Nicolaes Listingh, dated 31 August 1661. The will states that Hendrickje Stoffels was an unmarried young woman (‘bejaerde dochter’) residing on the Rozengracht. The Dutch word in the will used for ‘young woman’ is ‘bejaerde dochter’, literally meaning ‘old daughter’, but in legal terms it meant that she was not married, though she was old enough to do so. A young woman aged 20 or older could – under the laws of the state of Holland – marry without parental consent.
Notary Listingh noted that Hendrickje was known to him, however the notary adds that her physical condition was weak: ‘… although infirm of body, yet able to walk and stand, in possession and able to use her mind, memory, and speech, as it appeared’ (‘… hoewel sieckelyck van lichame nochtans gaende en staende, haer verstandt, memorie ende uytspraecke wel hebbende en gebruyckende soo ‘t bleeck’). Hendrickje wished to have her last will drawn up. The main contents of this will are as follows:
She authorized her brother-in-law Jan Carstensz. Pleckenpoel, residing in Bredevoort, to collect money and anything due to her from that regional area (‘uit die gewesten’) on her behalf. This clause will be included for certainty. It is difficult to say with certainty whether Hendrickje had been in the east of the country in the last 15 to 20 years. Whether she was owed money from third parties, including deceased family members, was also uncertain. But, the good notary solves the possible omission in the text of the will.
In the will, she also appointed Cornelia’s father, Rembrandt, to whom she was not married, as the guardian of their child Cornelia. With Titus as universal heir, it was her wish that his father would receive the benefits and enjoyment thereof for his nourishment during the rest of his life, again – as expressed in the will – shielding Rembrandt from creditors. In 1664, Rembrandt drafted a will himself; as Hendrickje’s will empowered him to appoint another guardian for Cornelia in the event of Rembrandt’s own death, he appointed his former pupil Christiaen Dusart.
[Christian Dusart, Young man by candlelight,
1645, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum]
As said, Hendrickje’s will also stated that she wished Rembrandt would not be liable for damages, losses or bankruptcy, nor be held accountable thereof. It is clear that such a provision was not only naïve, it was also legally void.
In addition, Hendrickje expressed her wish that the partnership in business (‘compagnie’), that she had established with Titus, documented in the contract before the notary in December 1660, would be continued by Rembrandt, as long as the latter deemed it advisable. The validity of this provision is questionable, however throughout the period from when the business contract became effective, in 1660, until the year Titus – the remaining contracting party – died, in 1668, little evidence exists that confirms the contract was ever actually applied.
6 The rest of the family
As an intermezzo, some extra information about Rembrandt’s descendants. Titus, the son of Saskia and Rembrandt, was some 13 years older than his half-sister Cornelia. Titus married at the age of 26, on 28 February 1668, in the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam. His bride was Magdalena van Loo, the niece of Saskia’s sister Hiskia. She was born in Amsterdam and baptized on 21 May 1642 in that same church. So, she was also 26 years old. Titus and Magdalena had one child, named Titia, who was born in Amsterdam and baptized on 22 March 1669 in the Nieuwe Zijds Kapel.
Sadly, only six months into the marriage, Titus died – most probably having succumbed to the plague. He had made a will in Leiden, the place where he died. His remains were shipped to Amsterdam. Bikker (2019), 181, has expressed doubts about the cause of Titus’ death as he submits that 1668 had not been a plague year in either Amsterdam or Leiden. The cause of death being the plague may indeed be wrong, as in such a case the body would not have been allowed to be transferred from Leiden to Amsterdam.
Magdalena was pregnant at the time. Their only child would be named Titia and she was baptized in March 1669. Magdalena died in the same year, just some two weeks after Rembrandt’s death on 4 October 1669.
With the passing of her father Titus in 1668 and that of her mother Magdalena in 1669, little Titia was not yet two years old when she became an orphan. She was 17 years old when, on 27 June 1686, she married in Sloten, a small village to the west of Amsterdam. Her husband was François van Bijlert, a jeweller, who was born around 1668 in Amsterdam and was the son of Titia’s guardian. They both died in Amsterdam and are buried in the Westerkerk; Titia in 1725 and François in 1728.
7 Some words on Cornelia
In my last podcast of 2024, I will discuss Rembrandt’s legacy. His granddaughter Titia is the only heir. In relation to Rembrandt, Cornelia – as an illegitimate child – had no legal position as heir. Cornelia had been appointed as the sole heir of Hendrickje.
What did not belong to the estate would cause a major conflict between the guardians of Titia, Frans van Bijlert, and those of Cornelia, Christian Dusart and Abraham Francen. One of the many complications and unpleasantries concerned Cornelia directly.
The question of whether certain items belonged to Rembrandt’s inheritance was on the minds of several persons. On 16 March 1670, six months after he’d passed away, three persons provided an affidavit with regard to a cupboard belonging to Hendrickje Stoffels. One of them is Rebecca Willems, a widow, who was residing in the house of mourning of Rembrandt (‘wonende int sterffhuys van Rembrant van Rijn op de Rosegraft’).
Rebecca Willems declared in her statement that Rembrandt had often said and – as the notary reported – she had heard him say from his own mouth that he once again had to take a sum from Cornelia’s money (‘… uyt sijn mont gehoort, dat hij seyde, dat hij alweer gelt van Cornelias gelt heeft moeten nemen’). Rebecca also stated that Rembrandt kept the money he took from Cornelia for some time to keep the house (‘… ende dat hij Rembrant met ‘t gelt, dat (hij) van Cornelia’s gelt affnam, eenige tijt thuys heeft opgehouden’) and that she knew that Cornelia possessed a bag of ducats in the cupboard (‘… dat sij Cornelia van Rhijn voorsz. een sack met silvere ducatons in de cas hadde’). A few days after Rembrandt’s death, Magdalena van Loo, the widow of Titus, had taken some pieces of gold, amounting to around 170 guilders, from the bag of silver ducats that was in Cornelia’s cupboard. Magdalena said that the gold (which she took from the bag with silver ducats) half belonged to her and then placed the bag with ducats back in the cupboard.
Rebecca and another witness claimed to have heard Rembrandt say on several occasions that the cupboard, and everything in it, belonged to ‘Cornelia Rijn’ alone. They also stated that they had been present the day after Rembrandt had died, when notary Steeman was in the house to seal the chambers and chests and closets (‘de kamers en kisten en casten’). They had seen that the notary who was in the house of mourning in the best room (‘de beste camer’), had pointed towards Cornelia’s closet to seal it too. He was told by Magdalena: ‘No, not that closet, it belongs to the child Cornelia van Rijn’, and directly gave the key to the closet to Christiaen Dusart, her guardian, and said: ‘Hey you, you keep the key of the closet for the child’ (‘Houdaer, beware gij de sleutel van de kas voor ‘t kint’), at which point he had taken the key.
Two days later, on 18 March 1670, Rebecca Willems again visited notary Hendrick Rosa. This time her statement related to money kept in the house. The notary recorded that again she provided a declaration in which she persisted in her earlier statement and wished to provide the following additions: that the day after Rembrandt’s death, Magdalena van Loo had come to her, Rebecca, and had asked her whether there was money in the house. She had answered no; Rembrandt had told her that for some time he had already been drawing on Cornelia’s money to keep the house (‘dat hij alrede eenige tijd uit Cornelia’s cas ‘t huys had opgehouden’). On hearing this, Magdalena had said, worriedly, I hope that father did not take the golden pieces of Cornelia, half of which belong to me (‘… deselve Magdalena daerop seyde, als perplect staende: “ick hoop niet, dat vader de goude pottstucken van Cornelia, daer mijn de helft van toecomen, genomen heeft”’). Soon after, Dusaert had come to the house and Magdalena had told him about this. Then Dusaert and Magdalena had demanded [from Rebecca?] the key to Cornelia’s closet and had opened the closet with it and, in the presence of her, Rebecca, had taken a bag of money (‘… sack gelt uyikreegh’). There was a smaller bag within it with gold coins which Magdalena had taken home with her with the knowledge and permission of Dusaert, and under the promise to substitute it with silver money.
Here, this particular episode draws to a close insofar as it was documented. It appears that not only Rembrandt himself, but also his seemingly few number of possessions, were still cause for legal quarrels. In the last years of his life, he had certainly displayed a rather unpleasant side to his character. Bikker (2019), 10, concludes that ‘… the aged artist had been penniless during his last years and for some time already had been dipping into his daughter Cornelia’s inheritance to pay the household bills’, submitting that the 15-year-old Cornelia must have been devastated not only to lose the last member of her immediate family (she lost her mother Hendrickje when she was around eight years old), but also to be confronted with the terrible fact that her father had probably been stealing from her. Although he was admired as an artist for many years, Rembrandt had ended up as a petty chaet (‘sjoemelaar’; ‘kruimelaar’). He had attempted to avoid his creditors through a so-called arrangement as a company set up between Hendrickje and Titus. It is not known whether these were his creditors after the end of the cessio bonorum or new creditors. Clear documentation on this is lacking. The way Rembrandt’s life unfolded in his final year is sad. He had to steal money from his daughter, whom he had not even acknowledged as his child, in order to make ends meet.
One year after Rembrandt’s death in 1669, Cornelia married Cornelis Suythoff and the couple moved to the West Indies. They both died in Batavia (present-day Jakarta); Cornelia in 1685 and Cornelis 1691. Their children were two sons, baptized there on 5 December 1673 and 14 July 1678 respectively. The oldest child was named: Rembrandt.
References
References mentioned or cited are available through the sources provided on www.rembrandtsmoney.com.