Abstract
From the very beginning of the RRP there were serious doubts about the authenticity of this painting, largely fed by an a priori assumption concerning Rembrandt’s stylistic development, viz. that Rembrandt’s style had developed consistently from ‘fine’ to ‘rough’. In view of the fact that, in places, there are extremely finely painted passages in this painting, it does not happily conform to that ‘a priori’ aspect of our idea of Rembrandt. In this entry particular attention is paid to the painting’s genesis and the visual means employed by the painter. The insights resulting from this analysis allow us to relate the painting to Rembrandt’s pictorial aims of the late 1640’s and to set out the arguments for its authenticity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
M. Hours, ‘Rembrandt. Observations et présentation de radiographies exécutées d’après les portraits et compositions du Musée du Louvre’, Bulletin du Laboratoire du Musée du Louvre, 1961, pp. 3–43, esp. 26.
J. Bauch and D. Eckstein, ‘Woodbiological investigations on panels of Rembrandt paintings’, Wood Science and Technology 15 (1981), pp. 251–263, esp. 255; Corpus IV, p. 658.
P. Klein, ‘Hat Rembrandt auf Zuckerkistenholz gemalt?’, Zuckerhistorische Beiträge aus der alten und neuen Welt (Schriften aus dem Zuckermuseum 25), Berlin 1988, pp. 37–43.
Van de Wetering 1997/2009, pp. 181–186.
Van de Wetering 1997/2009, p. 252.
Such as the painting of the same subject of c. 1629 (I A 16), an etching of 1634 (B. 88), as well as a drawing usually dated to the late 1640’s in Oxford (Ben. C47).
W. Stechow, ‘Rembrandts Darstellungen des Emmausmahles’, Zeitschr. f. Kunstgesch., new series 3 (1934), pp. 320–341; idem, ‘The myth of Philemon and Baucis in art’, Journal of Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 4 (1940/41), pp. 103–113, esp. 111; K. Clark, Rembrandt and the Italian Renaissance, New York 1966, pp. 53–61; J. Gantner, ‘Rembrandt und das Abendmahl des Leonardo’, Festschrift Friedrich Gerke, Baden-Baden 1962, pp. 179–184.
J.Q. van Regteren Altena, ‘Rembrandt’s way to Emmaus’, Kunstmuseets øAarskrift 35–36 (1948/49), pp. 1–25, esp. 15–18.
J.L.A.A.M. van Rijckevorsel, Rembrandt en de traditie, Rotterdam 1932, p. 177.
S. Slive, ‘An unpublished “Head of Christ” by Rembrandt’, Art Bull. 47 (1965), pp. 407–417, esp. 408.
G. Isarlov, ‘Rembrandt et son entourage’, La Renaissance, Revue d’ art, juillet-september 1936, [p. 31]; see also W.R. Valentiner, Rembrandt. Wiedergefundene Gemälde, Stuttgart/Berlin/Leipzig 1923, p. 85.
W.R. Valentiner, ‘Bust of Christ by Rembrandt’, Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts 12 (1930), pp. 1–3.
J. Foucart, Les peintures de Rembrandt au Louvre, Paris 1982, pp. 50–53 and 91–92.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Van De Wetering, E. (2011). Rembrandt — The supper at Emmaus. In: A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings. Stichting Foundation Rembrandt Research Project, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5786-1_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5786-1_19
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-4607-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-5786-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)