Abstract
What follows is a continuation of the Biographical Information which appeared in the first three volumes of A Corpus (Vol. I, p. 61, Vol. II, pp. 107–108 and Vol. III, pp. 57–59) and covers the period from 1642 to Rembrandt’s death. Documents by or about Rembrandt are presented chronologically, as in the previous volumes. The source publication edited by Strauss and Van der Meulen formed the starting point, but if there was any doubt about the accuracy of the transcription the version in Strauss Doc. was checked against the original. The translation in Strauss Doc. has been improved or adjusted where necessary. The same applies to the interpretation of the texts in the footnotes, which also include references and secondary literature. Because of the extent of the material, references to the latter have been kept to the absolute minimum. The picture of Rembrandt’s life is not always clear during these years. Thus while his affair with Geertje Dircx is dealt with in some detail in the sources and we are quite well informed about his financial difficulties in the mid 1650s, little is known about his life and work from 1642 to 1647. Lastly, mentions of Rembrandt’s work in probate invent- ories or other sources are not included.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Strauss Doc., 1646/5; the sculpture was on the account of Jacques Breyel of Antwerp.
Strauss Doc., 1646/6; see for The Birth of Christ and (the lost) Circumcision Br. 574 and Bauch 1966, A 31 respectively.
Strauss Doc., 1647/3; the assessment of 35 guilders represented the total of 7000 guilders.
Strauss Doc., 1647/6; this document, which was drawn up privately and has not survived, is referred to in a later deposition, ibid. 1659/12. The valuation of the property was 40,750 guilders, ibid. 1662/14. As heir to his mother, Titus was entitled to half of the joint estate. Saskia’s relatives were evidently concerned about Rembrandt’s management of the finances.
Strauss Doc., 1648/2; on Rembrandt’s involvement with Geertje Dircx (c. 1605/10-after 1656), who, probably while Saskia was still alive, was Titus’s dry nurse and with whom Rembrandt had a sexual relationship, see H.F. Wijnman, ‘Een episode uit het leven van Rembrandt: de geschiedenis van Geertje Dircks’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum 60 (1968), pp. 103-118 and D. Vis, Rembrandt en Geertje Dircx, Haarlem 1965. The jewellery referred to in the will was probably that which Rembrandt had given her and which originally belonged to Saskia. The obvious assumption is that Geertje’s portrait had been painted by Rembrandt, but Vis, p. 63, believes this was not the case.
Strauss Doc., 1649/4; Hendrickje Stoffels (c. 1626–1663), daughter of Sergeant Stoffel Jeger and Mechtelt Lamberts (H. Ruessink, ‘Hendrickje Stoffels, jongedochter van Bredevoort’, Jaarboek Achterhoek en Liemers 13 (1990), pp. 28–36), ran Rembrandt’s household and became his new love.
Strauss Doc., 1649/3.
Strauss Doc., 1649/7.
Strauss Doc., 1649/6.
Strauss Doc., 1649/7.
Strauss Doc., 1649/8.
Strauss Doc., 1649/9; when shortly afterwards Geertje drew up a power of attorney (ibid. 1650/3), she was about to move to ‘Rarep’. Arnold Houbraken was no doubt referring to Geertje when in his biography of Rembrandt (HdG Urk. no. 407) he wrote of the ‘boerinnetje van Rarep of Ransdorp in Waterlant’ (country girl from Rarep or Ransdorp in Waterland). According to Houbraken, who would have been relying on information supplied by his teacher Samuel van Hoogstraten (1627–1678), who had himself been one of Rembrandt’s pupils around 1645, she was ‘wat klein van persoon maar welgemaakt van wezen en poezel van lichaam’ (a little small in stature but well-shaped and with a plump figure). These last words suggest that Geertje was a model in Rembrandt’s workshop, cf. note 5 and Wijnman, op. cit.5, p. 105. The mention of’de minnemoer van Rembrant’ (Rembrandt’s nurse-maid) in a transfer of paintings (Strauss Doc., 1647/1, which also includes portraits of Rembrandt and his wife) points in the same direction.
Strauss Doc., 1650/4; the art dealer and bookseller Pieter de la Tombe (1593–1677) had had business dealings with him (ibid. 1656/12, nos. 34 and 109 and note 65 here) and twice had his portrait done by Rembrandt (A Corpus II, p. 92, note 7).
J. Bikker, ‘The Deutz brothers, Italian paintings and Michiel Sweerts: new information from Elisabeth Coymans’s Journael’, Simiolus 26 (1998), pp. 277–311, esp. 280, 286–287 and 311. Payment was made to Jean Deutz, who two months previously at an auction in the Amsterdam Herenlogement had bought paintings, sculptures and works on paper, a part of which could have been acquired by Rembrandt. Another possibility is that Deutz financed Rembrandt’s purchase of marble statues at the auction in 1646 (see under 13 September 1646) — Rembrandt’s purchase cost 186 guilders and 10 stuivers — and that that amount was repaid with interest.
Strauss Doc., 1652/1 and cf. ibid. 1653/4.
Strauss Doc., 1652/4 and cf. ibid. 1650/5. Geertje was released in 1655, ibid. 1655/2.
Strauss Doc., 1652/6 and cf. ibid. 1641/7.
Strauss Doc., 1652/7; this transaction with Jan Six (1618-1700) is apparent from a later document, ibid. 1658/18. The portrait of Saskia is in Kassel (II A 85), the Simeon in the temple is possibly a work by Jan Lievens (Schneider-Ekkart, p. 98, no. 26a), the St. John the Baptist preaching is the grisaille in Berlin (III A 106).
Strauss Doc., 1652/11, resp. Ben. 913 and 914; the first drawing has the autograph inscription ‘Rembrandt aenjoanus Six. 1652’, ibid., p. 291.
Strauss Doc., 1652/8.
Strauss Doc., 1653/1. Rembrandt had signed the contract to purchase the house in the Breestraat (the present Rembrandthuis) in January 1639 (ibid. 1639/1) and had moved into it, but the formal transfer of the property had not yet taken place. Now Rembrandt was forced to arrange this transfer. Only 6000 guilders of the purchase price of 13,000 guilders had been paid, see also the following note.
Strauss Doc., 1653/2 and cf. 1653/3 and 6. For the years 1650, 1651 and 1652 the heirs of the previous owner of the house in the Breestraat had paid part of the taxes on the rentable value. Moreover, since 1 November 1649 Rembrandt had made no further payments towards the interest he owed.
Strauss Doc., 1653/5; Cornelis Witsen (1605–1669) was paid in full five years later by the commissioners of the DBK, ibid. 1658/2.
Strauss Doc., 1653/6; Rembrandt had bought the house in 1639 (1639/1), but had by no means finished paying the purchase price, see under 8 and 11 January 1653 and also figs. la-b.
Strauss Doc., 1653/11; the bond has not survived, but the substance is apparent from a later document, ibid. 1657/3 and cf. 1659/15. Rembrandt had borrowed money from Six so that he could repay his debt to Christoffel Thijs.
Strauss Doc., 1653/12; Isaack van Hertsbeeck (d. 1668) had lent Rembrandt money because of his debt to Christoffel Thijs. He was later repaid the full amount by the DBK, but had to return it because Titus’ claim proved to be stronger, see below.
Strauss Doc., 1653/14; Heijmen Dullaert (1636–1684) signed as a cowitness; he is known as a pupil of Rembrandt, HdG Urk. nos. 410 and 427. The merchant François de Coster (1625–1653) died soon after this power of attorney was given. Rembrandt appointed Abraham Francen in his place, see 10 November 1653.
Strauss Doc., 1653/16 and here Ch.I, p.38; it was witnessed by Johannes (van) Glabbeeck (before 1634P-1686) and Jacobus Leveck (1634–1675),’ sijns getuygens dissipelen’ (the witness’ pupils).
Strauss Doc., 1653/17; Pieter de la Tombe signed as a witness. Abraham Francen (or: Fransz.) (1612-after 1672) is known to have been a friend of Rembrandt; he is presumably portrayed in one of his etchings (B. 273), see J. Six, ‘Rembrandt’s voorbereiding van de etsen van Jan Six en Abraham Francen’, Onze Kunst 7 (1908), pp. 53–65 and K.G. Boon, ‘Abraham Francen of Otto van Cattenburch’, De Kroniek van het Rembrandthuis 24 (1970), pp. 89–91.
Strauss Doc., 1654/4; the young woman has been provisionally identified as Beatriz Nunes Henriques, a relative of D’Andrada, who was married in 1654 in Hamburg to Manuel Teixeira de Sampayo, see J. van der Veen, ‘Faces from life: Ironies and portraits in Rembrandt’s painted oeuvre’, in: exhib. cat. Rembrandt, a genius and his impact, Melbourne, National Gallery of Victoria and Canberra, National Gallery of Australia 1997/8, pp. 69–80, esp. 77.
Strauss Doc., 1654/6 and 7. In 1650 the lawyer and merchant Nicolaes Duysentdaelders (c. 1620–1662) had bought a plot in the Handboogstraat and built a house on it which he sold on 23 October 1653 to Otto van Cattenburgh (1612-c. 1666/70?), councillor ordinary of the Count of Brederode and treasurer and secretary of Vianen. He paid in part in the form of a bill of exchange which Duysentdaelders passed on to Rembrandt, I.H. van Eeghen, ‘Handboogstraat 5‘, Maandblad Amstelodamum 56 (1969), pp. 169–176. On 1 May, when the bill became due, Rembrandt asked Dirck van Cattenburgh for payment, because his brother Otto was no longer in the city. Rembrandt had business dealings with the merchant Dirck van Cattenburgh (1616–1704) from the early 1650s until his death. The painter Hercules Sanders (1606-in or after 1663) rented a house in the Handboogstraat from Otto van Cattenburgh. See also under 25 December 1655.
Strauss Doc., 1654/10 and J. Giltaij, Ruffo en Rembrandt. Over een Siciliaanse verzamelaar in de zeventiende eeuw die drie schilderijen bij Rembrandt bestelde, Amsterdam 1997, pp. 35–42 and app. B, xi; the work in question is Rembrandt’s Aristotle contemplating a bust of Homer (Br. 478), cf. Strauss Doc., 1654/16. The friend referred to is the Italian nobleman and art collector Antonio Ruffo (1610/1–1678), who had earlier commissioned the painting from Rembrandt, probably in 1652. Rembrandt later painted two other works for him for which Ruffo provided only a rough outline of what was required.
Strauss Doc., 1654/11; Hendrickje (see note 6) was pregnant with Rembrandt’s child, ibid. 1654/18. When she failed to appear on 2 July, she was summoned again, ibid. 1654/12.
Strauss Doc., 1654/14.
Strauss Doc., 1654/15.
Strauss Doc., 1654/18.
Strauss Doc., 1654/20 and cf. 1655/3.
Strauss Doc., 1655/6; Abraham Francen signed as a witness. The exclusion of his mother’s side of the family may indicate that the 14-year-old Titus was under his father’s influence or that he wanted to support him.
Strauss Doc., 1655/7; it is not known what was sold at this time. The landlord charged Rembrandt a total of 130 guilders and 2 stuivers, ibid. 1660/2.
Strauss Doc., 1655/8; Thomas Asselijn signed as a witness (see note 108 here). Rembrandt, who was badly in need of cash, may have planned to sell his house in the Breestraat and move into more modest accom-modation. In any event, the transaction did not take place. Lodewijck van Ludick (1607–1669) and Dirck van Cattenburgh were both merchants and active in the art trade. On the etched portrait of Six of 1647, see B. 285.
Strauss Doc., 1656/2; this matter probably had to do with Geertje. Shortly before, she had dismissed her brother Pieter as her guardian (ibid. 1656/1) and may (Wijnman, op. cit.5, pp. 115–116) have begun proceedings against Rembrandt to obtain compensation for her, in her view unlawful, confinement in the house of correction at Gouda. In that case Rembrandt might have needed Pieter Dircksz. as a witness.
Strauss Doc., 1656/4; on the subsequent 6 May at Edam a statement was made at the request of Geertje, ibid. 1656/5.
Strauss Doc., 1656/5.
Strauss Doc., 1656/6; in the document it is stated incorrectly that the house is unencumbered.
Strauss Doc., 1656/7; Abraham Francen signed as a co-witness.
Strauss Doc., 1656/8; the promisory note registered with the aldermen (’schepenkennis’) has not survived, but the amount is apparent from later documents, ibid. 1656/18 and 19. The surgeon Daniel Fransz. was a brother of the Abraham Francen mentioned here several times.
Strauss Doc., 1656/10; he lists as his principal creditors Cornells Witsen, Isaack van Hertsbeeck, Daniel Fransz., Gerbrand Ornia (as guarantor of the loan from Jan Six of 7 March 1653), Geertje Dircx and Gerrit Boelens. He also lists his sister-in-law Hiskia Uylenburgh, though later there is no other evidence of a debt to her, ibid. 1656/20 and I.H. van Eeghen, ‘Rembrandt en Hiskia’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 55 (1968), pp. 30–34. The reasons Rembrandt gave seem to refer to both the art trade and other business matters (freight?).
Strauss Doc., 1656/11.
Strauss Doc., 1656/12. The inventory does not give a complete picture of what Rembrandt must once have had. Missing from it, for example, are painter’s tools and etching materials as well as clothing and (self-)portraits. The inventory lists hardly any household effects. Yet there was enough to be worth taking to the pawnshop in April 1658. It is clear that either quite a lot had disappeared by the time the inventory was taken (Rembrandt had previously held an auction which lasted for several weeks, see note 39), or that for whatever reason goods were not listed. It may be that Rembrandt pawned works of art or, for instance, etching plates; these had to be included in the list of assets and liabilities (’staat’) (not extant) but not in the inventory of the moveable property. R.W. Serieller, ‘Rembrandt en de encyclopedische kunstkamer’, O.H. 84 (1969), pp. 81–147 provides a detailed analysis; see also R. van Gelder and J. van der Veen, ‘A collector’s cabinet in the Breestraat. Rembrandt as a lover of art and curiosities’, in: B. van den Boogert (ed.), Rembrandt’s treasures, Zwolle 1999, pp. 33–89, A Corpus vol. II, pp. 93-95 and here Chapter I. On the bankruptcy, see S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669): A changing portrait of the artist’, in: exhib. cat. Rembrandt. Paintings, 1991/92, pp. 50–67, esp. 60–61.
Strauss Doc., 1656/14; on 4 April 1658 Verwout was succeeded in this position by Louis Crayers, ibid. 1658/11.
Strauss Doc., 1656/18; the loan was 3150 guilders, see under 30 May 1656 and below.
Strauss Doc., 1656/19.
Strauss Doc., 1657/3; see under 7 March 1653 and below under [March] 1659.
Strauss Doc., 1657/5; cf. the deed of 24 November 1655 and the will immediately below.
Strauss Doc., 1657/8.
Strauss Doc., 1658/2 and cf. 1658/7.
Strauss Doc., 1658/3 and 1658/4 and cf. 1659/4. According to Houbraken, Rembrandt rented a warehouse on the Bloemgracht where his pupils worked in spaces partitioned off by sailcloth, HdG Urk. no. 407, §5.
Strauss Doc., 1658/6; Isaac Francx (1610–1663) had made a loan to Rembrandt of which 116 guilders and five stuivers was still outstanding and for which the artist had given four paintings as security. Francx was not to receive the entire amount back, see ibid. 1659/2, on the auction 1658/15 and on his claim 1658/24. That the loan to Rembrandt amounted to 200 guilders is apparent from the probate inventory of Cornelia Francx, widow of Hendrick Dircksz. Spiegel, in which the bonds include one for 200 guilders to the account of Rembrandt whereby it is noted that 90 guilders and 15 stuivers was received from the DBK, GAA, not. H. Outgers, NA 3244, deed 98, dd. 21 November 1679. Cornelia Francx was assigned this bond from the estate of her brother Isaac Francx, who died unmarried in 1663.
Strauss Doc., 1658/9; after Rembrandt’s death a statement was made65 about the chest containing linen, clothing and silver worth 600 guilders, see HdG Urk. no. 314.
Strauss Doc., 1658/11 and here under 6 September 1656. It seems that Verwout had died shortly before. Louis Crayers (1623–1668) looked after Titus’ interests conscientiously. A detailed list of books found in Crayers’s house after his death includes ‘een memoriaelboeck’ (daybook) for the66 period 2 July 1665 to 31 December 1667 in which the first item is ‘Titus van Rijn moet hebben f 4200:-:-soo veel van Isaack Hartsbeeck67 ontfangen’ (Titus van Rijn to have f 4200:-:-this has been received from Isaac Hartsbeeck) (GAA, not. A. Lock, NA 2262, pp. 196–199, dd. 30 October 1668), while among his paintings there is ‘een conterfeytsel van Rembrand van Rijn en zijn vrouw [Saskia?]’ (a portrait of Rembrandt van Rijn and his wife [Saskia?]) (ibid., pp. 1090–1116, dd. 4 August 1677-14 January 1678, esp. 1100 and HdG Urk. no. 336).
Strauss Doc., 1658/13.
Strauss Doc., 1658/14.
Strauss Doc., 1658/18.
Strauss Doc., 1658/19; the auction took place on 20 December. The book-seller and art dealer Adriaen Hendricksz. de Wees (1595–1674) was well acquainted with Rembrandt, see under 19 March 1659. 65 Strauss Doc., 1658/26; payment was made a day later, ibid. 1658/27 and cf. 1658/28. Instead of Jacob de la Tombe (1604–1656) his brother Pieter (see note 13), who dealt with Jacob’s estate, must be intended. The paintings sold which gave rise to the preferential claim belonged to Rembrandt and Pieter de la Tombe jointly, but it is likely that Jacob had lent his brother Pieter money for their purchase.
Strauss Doc., 1658/25 and see under 14 March 1653. This was opposed (successfully) by Louis Crayers on behalf of his ward, see 5 May 1660. 67 Strauss Doc., 1658/29; the printed auction flyer stated that the works on paper consisted of ‘de konst van verscheyden der voornaemste so Italiaensche, Fransche, Duytsche ende Nederlandtsche meesters’ (the art of several of the most prominent Italian, French, German and Netherlandish masters). The auction probably took place on 28 December. Rembrandt himself may well have drawn up an inventory of his collection of art on paper, see L. Münz, ‘Eine unpublizierte Zeichnung Rembrandts’, Alte und Neue Kunst 1 (1952), pp. 152-156 and here fig. 2.
Strauss Doc., 1659/12 and above under 1647.
Strauss Doc., 1659/11; the painter Philips Köninck (1619–1688) belonged to Rembrandt’s circle of acquaintances.
Strauss Doc., 1659/13.
Strauss Doc., 1659/14.
Strauss Doc., 1659/16 and cf. 1659/19; the work referred to here is The Night Watch (III A 146).
Strauss Doc., 1659/17; on Susanna and the elders, see Br. 516. Rembrandt also painted Banck’s portrait, Strauss Doc., 1660/13 and Van der Veen, op. cit.30, ‘Faces from life: Ironies and portraits in Rembrandt’s painted oeuvre’, in: exhib. cat. Rembrandt, a genius and his impact, Melbourne, National Gallery of Victoria and Canberra, National Gallery of Australia 1997/8, p. 78, esp. 77.
Strauss Doc., 1659/18. It is clear from later documents that this was a double portrait of Abraham Wilmerdoncx (1604–1669), governor of the West India Company, and his wife Anna van Beaumont (1607–1686); the last mention of it is in 1721.
Strauss Doc., 1659/19 and note 74 here.
Strauss Doc., 1659/20. Rembrandt had bought the work in question in 1637, ibid. 1637/6.
Strauss Doc., 1659/21. The deposition does not make clear whether the work was a portrait of Andries de Graeff (1611–1678) or of someone else (a relative?). The document has been linked to the Portrait of a man standing in Kassel, see III A 129 and cf. exhib. cat. Rembrandt. Paintings, 1991/92, no. 29 and Van der Veen, op. cit.30, ‘Faces from life: Ironies and portraits in Rembrandt’s painted oeuvre’, in: exhib. cat. Rembrandt, a genius and his impact, Melbourne, National Gallery of Victoria and Canberra, National Gallery of Australia 1997/8, p. 76, esp. 77. and note 34.
Strauss Doc., 1659/15; this was Jan Six’s loan to Rembrandt, for which Van Ludick had stood surety. Six had transferred it to Ornia, see under 7 March 1653 and 1 August 1657.
Strauss Doc., 1659/8.
Strauss Doc., 1660/22–26.
Strauss Doc., 1660/1. Van Ludick kept the paintings in his possession; on 28 August 1662 the transaction was cancelled.
Strauss Doc., 1660/6; the tenor of this ruling is evident from a later document, see under 22 December 1662; on the loan see under 14 March 1653 and 17 December 1658.
Strauss Doc., 1660/11; this made it possible for the buyer to deposit the purchase price with the DBK so that ownership of the house could be officially transferred to him, cf. 1660/18 and 1660/21 and here under 9 September 1665.
Strauss Doc., 1660/20 and the will cited below which was made by Hendrickje on 7 August 1661; the fact that Titus was assisted by Rembrandt indicates that the agreement was concluded without the cooperation (or knowledge?) of his legal guardian.
Strauss Doc., 1661/3. Various scholars, poets and artists made contributions to the album for Jacobus Heyblocq (1623–1690), headmaster of the Latin School in Amsterdam; on the drawing, see Ben. 1057.
Strauss Doc., 1661/17.
Strauss Doc., 1661/5 and Giltaij, op. cit.32, Ruffo en Rembrandt. Over een Siciliaanse verzamelaar in de zeventiende eeuw die drie schilderijen bij Rembrandt bestelde, Amsterdam 1997, pp. 43–56 and Appendix B, nos. xi al-2. On the Homer (Br. 483) see also Strauss Doc., 1662/11 and on Ruffo see under 19 June 1654.
Strauss Doc., 1661/6; the painter Christiaen Dusart (1618–1682/3) signed as a co-witness.
Strauss Doc., 1661/8; ‘bejaerde dochter’ means that she was of age and unmarried.
Strauss Doc., 1661/12; Titus signed as a witness. This document indicates that, though not married to Rembrandt, Hendrickje was regarded as his partner; see also Rembrandt’s codicil cited below.
Strauss Doc., 1662/15 and see also under 28 August 1662. The reference is to The conspiracy of Julius (Claudius) Civilis (Br. 482), which was probably hung in the town hall in 1662; it was certainly there in the summer of that year because the foreword to Fokkens’ book is dated 21 July 1662. It was removed in the course of that year. Rembrandt had to make changes to the painting. It was not to return and was replaced by a work by Jurriaen Ovens. Only part of Rembrandt’s large painting survives.
Strauss Doc., 1662/16, resp. 1662/17, 1662/18 and 1662/19 (and see Br. 530).
Strauss Doc., 1662/4. Karel van der Pluym (1625–1672) is believed to have been a pupil of Rembrandt in about 1646 and to have lodged during his apprenticeship with his uncle Willem Jansz. van der Pluym, a first cousin of Rembrandt, who drew his portrait (probably Ben. 433, see P. Schatborn, ‘Van Rembrandt tot Crozat. Vroege verzamelingen met tekeningen van Rembrandt’, NKJ 32 (1981), pp. 1–54, esp. 9). In 1648 he became a member of the St Luke’s Guild in Leiden, and in 1652 headman and in 1654/5 dean, but later withdrew. He stopped painting in 1650/1 (probably professionally), D.J. Noordam, Geringde buffets en heren van stand. Hetpatriciaat van Leiden, 1574–1700, Hilversum 1994, p. 84 and note 212.
Strauss Doc., 1662/6: see under (19?) March 1659 and 4 June 1664. The Circumcision may be Br. 596; on The conspiracy of Julius (Claudius) Civilis see note 93 here. It is not clear whether the portrait Rembrandt promised to deliver was to be of Van Ludick himself. Parts of this agreement were not carried out, because Van Ludick subsequently made over his claims on Rembrandt to Harmen Becker, see under 4 June 1664 and 24 July 1668.
Strauss Doc., 1662/9; the transfer of ownership took place on 1 November, ibid. Strauss Doc., 1662/10.
Strauss Doc., 1662/11, Giltaij, op. cit.32, Ruffo en Rembrandt. Over een Siciliaanse verzamelaar in de zeventiende eeuw die drie schilderijen bij Rembrandt bestelde, Amsterdam 1997, pp. 43–66 and Appendix B, xi and here under 19 June 1654; the letter was to be delivered to Isaac Just, through whom Ruffo communicated with Rembrandt, by ‘Vallembrot’ or Giovanni Battista van den Broeck, the Dutch consul in Sicily. Van den Broeck probably had to wait in Amsterdam until the Homer was finished so that he could take it with him. See also the receipt of 16 November 1662 given by a captain who stated that he had received from Ruffo a painting packed in a chest, evidently the half-finished Homer being sent back to Amsterdam. The work did not arrive in Messina until 20 May 1664.
Strauss Doc., 1662/12; according to Giltaij, op. cit.32, Ruffo en Rembrandt. Over een Siciliaanse verzamelaar in de zeventiende eeuw die drie schilderijen bij Rembrandt bestelde, Amsterdam 1997, p. 47, there is no evidence that Rembrandt made a new version.
Strauss Doc., 1662/13; the document is not extant, but its contents become apparent when the debt is paid, see under 6 October 1665. Harmen Becker (c. 1617–1678) was a wealthy merchant and an art collector who frequently made loans to artists for which he received works of art as security. For transactions he availed himself of the sendees of Philips Köninck. At his death Becker possessed a number of paintings by Rembrandt, HJ. Postma, ‘De Amsterdamse verzamelaar Herman Becker (ca. 1617–1678). Nieuwe gegevens over een geldschieter van Rembrandt’, O.H. 102 (1988), pp. 1–21.
Strauss Doc., 1662/14 and notes 60, 66, 84 and 85 above. Van Hertsbeeck appealed to the Supreme Court in The Hague, the highest court, see under 26 January 1665.
Strauss Doc., 1663/1, the loan is apparent from its repayment on 6 October 1665.
Strauss Doc., 1663/2.
Strauss Doc., 1663/4.
R. Schillemans, ‘Gabriel Bucelinus and “The Names of the Most Distinguished European Painters”’, The Hoogsteder-Naumann Mercury 6 (1987), pp. 25–37. Gabriel Bucelinus (1599–1681) was acquainted with Rembrandt’s former pupil Samuel van Hoogstraten, see also E. van de Wetering, ‘The miracle of our age. Rembrandt through the eyes of his contemporaries’, in: exhib. cat. Rembrandt… 1997/98, op. cit.30, a genius and his impact, Melbourne, National Gallery of Victoria and Canberra, National Gallery of Australia 1997/8, pp. 58–68.
Strauss Doc., 1664/3 and see under 28 August 1662.
Strauss Doc., 1664/4.
Strauss Doc., 1664/6. Thomas Asselijn (c. 1620–1701) was a dyer and had something of a reputation as a poet; he was a brother of the painter Jan Asselijn (c. 1610–1652). The Asselijns were acquainted with Rembrandt and Francen. Around 1647 Rembrandt etched a portrait of Jan Asselijn (B. 277). In 1667 Thomas Asselijn owned ‘een copie naer Rembrandt, daer Christus werd gegeselt’ (a copy after Rembrandt, depicting the flagellation of Christ) (ibid. 1667/3) — this was probably the ‘copye nae de geesselingh Cristi, nae Rembrant’ (copy after the flagellation of Christ, after Rembrandt) (ibid. 1656/12, no. 302) in Rembrandt’s estate — and in 1685 ‘2 conterfijtsels van Rembrand f 50:-:-’ (2 portraits by Rembrandt f 50:-:-) (GAA, not. J. Paerslaken, NA 3474, dd. 20 January 1685).
Strauss Doc., 1665/2; see under 22 December 1662. Van Hertsbeeck was again fined for appealing too lightly. He was ordered to repay the money (ibid. 1665/7), and eventually complied (ibid. 1665/13 and 14). No part of his loan was ever repaid; the inventory of Van Hertsbeeck lists under ‘de dubieuse ende desperate schulden’ (doubtful and bad debts): ‘Rembrand Hermans schilder volgens schepekennis en’t renteboek fo. 7 voor capl. 4000 gl. en een jaer intrest 200 gl., samen gl. 4200’ (according to the certificate of indebtedness and the book of interest paid, Rembrandt, painter, owes 4000 guilders and one year’s interest of 200 guilders, together 4200 guilders), GAA, not. A. van den Ende, NA 3663, fol. 92–101, dd. 18 October 1669, esp. fol. 158v and A. Bredius, ‘Rembrandtiana’, O.H. 28 (1910), pp. 1–18, esp. 5.
Strauss Doc., 1665/3; Pieter Claesz. van Medenblick had been married to an aunt of Rembrandt. Cf. 1665/4, whereby two individuals, one of them Karel van der Pluym, acted as trustees for the underage Titus.
Strauss Doc., 1665/5 and 6; the portrait in question was to be of Hendrick’s father Jan Antonides van der Linden (1609–1664) and was to be included in a posthumous publication. The print was to be done after an existing portrait (probably one painted by Abraham van den Tempel). In the end Rembrandt produced an etched portrait after all (B. 264).
Strauss Doc., 1665/9 and 10. At the age of (nearly) 24, Titus was still a minor, which was a hindrance in’ sijne handelinge’ (his dealings). He submitted this request with his father’s agreement. Jacob Claesz. Vermaeten was married to a daughter of Willem Jansz. van der Pluym.
Strauss Doc., 1665/11 and 12.
Strauss Doc., 1665/16. Karel van der Pluym and Alexander de Koning stood surety for any possible repayment.
Strauss Doc., 1665/17; see under 7 December 1662 and 28 March 1663 and also HdG Urk. no. 310. The inventory of Becker includes ‘een Juno van Rembrant van Rijn’ (a Juno by Rembrandt van Rijn), possibly Br.-Gerson 639.
Strauss Doc., 1665/18; the contents of this document have been preserved through a later copy, S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Borgstelling van Titus van Rijn voor de ontvangst van het geld van de verkoop van het Rembrandthuis’, Kroniek van het Rembrandthuis 1995, no. 1, pp. 23–28. On 5 November 1665 Titus acknowledged the receipt of f 6952:9:-. The cloth merchant Bartholomeus (or earlier: Bartholdus) van Beuningen (1623–1666) may have been a close friend of Titus.
Strauss Doc., 1665/19.
Strauss Doc., 1665/20.
Strauss Doc., 1666/3.
Strauss Doc., 1666/4; at first the painter Christiaen Dusart was also authorised, but in the original instrument his name is crossed out.
Strauss Doc., 1667/4; for the verdict see below under 24 July 1668.
Strauss Doc., 1667/6 and IV 28 here.
Strauss Doc., 1668/1; the name of the intended bridegroom (i.e. Titus) is not followed by his profession, which was unusual. Magdalena van Loo (1642–1669) was one of the thirteen children of the goldsmith Jan van Loo (1589–1659) and Anna Huybrechts (1602–1669). Rembrandt had known the family for years. Jan’s brother Gerrit van Loo was married to Saskia’s sister Hiskia Uylenburgh. Rembrandt had painted Anna Huybrechts’s portrait before 1666, ibid. 1666/1 and S.A.C. Dudok van Heel, ‘Anna Huibrechts en Rembrandt van Rijn’, Maandblad Amstelodamum 64 (1977), pp. 30–33.
Strauss Doc., 1668/2.
Strauss Doc., 1668/5; the debt to Christiaen Dusart is apparent from a document of 19 September 1670, when the guardian of Titus’s daughter repaid this amount with interest and was given back the album and drawings, HdG Urk. no. 319.
Strauss Doc., 1668/6 and see under 28 August 1662.
Y.M. Prins, ‘Het testament van Titus van Rhijn’, Genealogie 3 (1997), no. 1, pp. 8–9; Titus, who was sick and bedridden when the will was made, died shortly thereafter, possibly in Leiden.
C.D. van Strien, British travellers in Holland during the Stuart period. Edward Browne and John Locke as tourists in the United Provinces, Amsterdam 1989, pp. 181–182, esp. note 22. The physician Edward Browne (1644–1708) visited the Dutch Republic in 1668.
Strauss Doc., 1668/8.
Strauss Doc., 1669/1; Van Bijler was Titus’s guardian.
Strauss Doc., 1669/4; the date of death is given in a note by a relative of Rembrandt. The funeral took place four days later in the Westerkerk, ibid. 1669/6.
Strauss Doc., 1669/5.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van Der Veen, J. (2005). Biographical information 1643–1669. In: A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. Rembrandt Research Project Foundation, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4441-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4441-0_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3280-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4441-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)