CHAPTER VII

There is still no lack of portraits in 1643. There are two pairs, "The Gentleman with the Hawk," and "The Lady with the Fan," at Grosvenor House, which, however, Dr Bode and M. Michel decline to admit among Rembrandt's works, and "The Dutch Admiral" and "His Wife," now in America. It is doubtful whether the "Old Woman weighing Money," at Dresden [No. 1564], ought to be included among the portraits; but there can be no question about the "Young Man in a Cap and Breastplate," in the same gallery [No. 1565], the "Old Woman," in the Hermitage [No. 807], called "Rembrandt's Mother," or the "Man," in the collection of Mr Armour. The other "Old Man," belonging to Mr Schloss of Paris, is probably only a study; and the "Portrait of a Man," incorrectly called Six, in the collection of Morris K. Jessup of New York, is but conjecturally a work of this year. There are three portraits of himself: one at Weimar, one belonging to Prince Henri of the Pays Bas, one, signed but undated, at Carlsruhe [No. 238]; and there is a portrait, called Saskia, at Berlin [No. 812]. The only signed subject of the year is the "Bathsheba at her Toilet," in the Steengracht collection at the Hague; but "The Holy Family," at Downton, was painted about that time.

The next year has very small results to show, and might, taken by itself, support the belief in the sudden unpopularity of Rembrandt were there not five other years for which we can now find only five pictures, and several with fewer. All the five of 1644 are signed. Three are portraits: Captain Holford's "Man with a Sword," Earl Cowper's "Young Man," and the fancifully named "Constable of Bourbon," in the collection of Herr Thieme at Leipzig. There is one subject-picture, "The Woman taken in Adultery," painted for Jan Six, and now in the National Gallery [No. 45]. Another of the same subject, in the possession of Consul Weber at Hamburg, bears, according to M. Michel, a forged signature, and is regarded by him as very doubtful.

There are four subject-pictures dated 1645. First and foremost is "The Holy Family," in the Hermitage [No. 796]. Fine also is "The Tribute Money," belonging to Mr Beaumont, though much more summarily handled. The "Daniel's Vision," at Berlin [No. 806], is more careful in treatment, but the companion picture, "Tobias' Wife with the Goat" [No. 805], is little more than a sketch. At Berlin, also, are two of the five dated portraits of that year, one of "A Rabbi," in the Museum [No. 828A], and one of "J. C. Sylvius," in the collection of Herr von Carstangen. The Hermitage has one portrait [No. 820], called at one time "Manasseh ben Israel." A "Portrait of a Young Girl," in the Dulwich Gallery [No. 206], and "An Orphan Girl of Amsterdam," now in the United States, are probably works painted for the purpose of study, rather than portraits; and the same remark applies to the "Portrait of Himself," at Buckingham Palace, which, though the last figure of the date is wanting, was, in all likelihood, a work of that year.

The "Portrait of a Lady," in the collection of Captain Holford; the little sketch of "An Old Man Seated," belonging to the executors of the late Sir F. Cook, and "An Old Man," at Dresden [No. 1571], are undated portraits of about this time; while the "Man reading by a Window," in the Carlsberg Glyptotek at Copenhagen, if it be really a Rembrandt, which is doubtful, is an undated subject. There are, furthermore, two landscapes, both undated, one at Oldenburg [No. 169], and one in the collection of Mme. Lacroix at Paris.

Another landscape, "A Winter Scene," at Cassel [No. 219], is dated 1646, as is a "Portrait of a Young Man," belonging to Mr Humphry Ward. There are also four subject-pictures bearing the same date, two of "The Adoration of the Shepherds," one in the National Gallery [No. 47], painted originally for Six, and one at Munich [No. 331], differing entirely in arrangement; one of "Christ bound to the Column," in the collection of Herr von Carstangen at Berlin; and the "Holy Family," called "The Woodchopper," at Cassel [No. 218].

1647 is inscribed on only five pictures. Two are the portraits called "Nicholas Berchem," and "His Wife," at Grosvenor House, and a small one of "An Old Man," at Leeuwarden, in the collection of Baron van Harinxma. A fourth of "Dr Bonus," in the Six collection, is not dated, but as it exactly resembles the etching of that year, it is, with much reason, attributed to it. There is only one subject, "Susannah and the Elders," in the Berlin Gallery [No. 828E]. Two undated studies also belong to about that time, a small head and shoulders of "Susannah," belonging to M. Léon Bonnat of Paris, and the "Woman bathing," at the Louvre [No. 2550]. A large picture of "Joseph's Coat," in the collection of the Earl of Derby, is one of the most ungraceful and undignified spectacles that even Rembrandt's stern realism ever produced. Enchanting, on the other hand, in its truth and delicacy is the "The Shepherds reposing at Night," in the National Gallery of Ireland, with its contrasted effects of firelight and moonlit night.

No known portrait bears the date 1648, though one of "A Young Painter with Papers and Crayon," signed Rembrandt 164—, is believed to belong to about that year. There are, however, four dated subject-pictures: two at the Louvre—"Christ at Emmaus" [No. 2539], and "The Good Samaritan" [No. 2537],—one, "Hannah teaching the Infant Samuel to read," at Bridgewater House, and one, a different version of "Christ at Emmaus," at Copenhagen [No. 292]. A small picture of "Christ on the Cross," in the collection of Herr Carl Hollitscher at Berlin, was also probably painted about this time.

The succeeding year, 1649, is one of the two that has no dated picture, and were it not for the "Portrait of Marshal Turenne," at Panshanger, which must have been painted that year—if indeed it be his, which has recently been doubted—we should have to regard it as utterly barren; for M. Jules Porgès' "Old Woman" is only supposititiously of that date. We may be sure, however, that some of the large number of unsigned pictures attributed to about that time were undoubtedly painted in the course of it. Of these there are several in public galleries: "The Slaughter-house," at Glasgow [No. 707], from the date on which the two last figures are missing; the portrait of "His Brother," in the Emperor Frederick Museum at Berlin; the "Bust of an Old Man," at Strasburg; the "Portrait of Himself," at Leipzig; "The Ruin," at Cassel [No. 220]; the picture, called "The Metamorphosis of Narcissus," at Amsterdam [No. 1251]; and five pictures in the Hermitage: "Abraham entertaining the Angels" [No. 791], "The Sons of Jacob bringing him Joseph's Coat" [No. 793], "The Disgrace of Haman" [No. 795], "Pallas" [No. 809], and "Hannah teaching Samuel to read" [No. 822], none of which is dated, though the second, third, and fifth are signed. There are also in private hands, two portraits in those of M. Jules Porgès, a portrait in M. Bonnat's, and others. Dated pictures of the year 1650 are rare. There is a "Portrait of Himself," in the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge, and one, "His Brother," at the Hague [No. 560]; and three subject-pictures, "Tobit and his Wife," the Duke of Abercorn's "Deposition," and "The Young Woman in Bed," in the National Gallery, Edinburgh.

The same number of pictures is dated 1651. Four are portraits: one of himself, belonging to Herr Mendelssohn of Berlin; the "Old Man," in the possession of the Duke of Devonshire; "The Man with a Baton," in the Louvre [No. 2551], and "The Girl with a Broom," in the Hermitage [No. 286]. The subject-picture "Christ and Mary Magdalene in the Garden," called "Noli me tangere," is at Brunswick [No. 235].

The next two years are very deficient in dated pictures. Two only, "The Old Man," seated in a chair, belonging to the Duke of Devonshire, and the "Portrait of Bruyningh," at Cassel [No. 221], are dated 1652; but the picture of "Hendrickje Stoffels," in the Louvre [No. 2547], and a "Head of Christ," belonging to M. Rodolphe Kann of Paris, are of about that year. 1653 has only one, "The Portrait of a Man," wrongly entitled Van der Hooft, belonging to the Earl of Brownlow, for "The Entombment," at Dresden [No. 1566], is but a copy of the picture at Munich [No. 330], touched up by Rembrandt. Here again we may safely accord to the seemingly empty year some of the undated pictures of the period, which include six portraits, one of which, "An Old Man," is in the Hermitage [No. 818]. "An Old Woman," in the same collection [No. 804], may also belong to the year, for it is very similar to the two pictures, dated the following year [Nos. 805 and 806]. The only other undated pictures which call for special mention are two landscapes: the "Mill," in the collection of the Marquis of Lansdowne, and the one at Glasgow [No. 705], which is known as "Tobias and the Angel" from the figures in the foreground.

The dated pictures of 1654 are nine portraits and two subjects, "Bathsheba," at the Louvre [No. 2549], being one, and "The Woman bathing," at the National Gallery [No. 54], the other. Of the portraits, one of himself, doubted, however, by Dr Bode, is at Munich, [No. 333], "An Old Man with a Beard," at Dresden [No. 1567], "An Old Woman," at Brussels [No. 397A], "An Old Jew," "An Old Man," and "An Old Woman," besides the two old women being in the Hermitage [Nos. 810, 823, and 825], while "The Young Servant" is at Stockholm [No. 584]. Most, if not all of these, however, were studies painted because his still restless energy would not allow him to be idle. The same may be said of the portraits dated 1655, only two of which we can even suppose to have been commissions—the companion pictures of "An Old Man," and "An Old Woman," at Stockholm [Nos. 581 and 582]; the two others bearing dates being studies of his son "Titus," one in the collection of M. Rodolphe Kann, the other in that of the Earl of Crawford. The dated picture at Glasgow [No. 706], like the undated "Man in Armour," at Cassel, is rather a study of armour than a picture. The portrait at the Louvre [No. 2546], a copy of one at Cassel [No. 225], and the rest of the undated heads, mostly of small size, painted about that time, are simply sketches or studies, the only subjects being "The Slaughter-house," in the Louvre [No. 2548], and two pictures of "Joseph accused by Potiphar's Wife," differing only in details, one at Berlin [No. 828E], and one in the Hermitage [No. 794], for "The Flight into Egypt," at Buda-Pesth, though belonging to the period, is undated.

1656, the year of his actual bankruptcy, was an unusually prolific one, including "The Anatomy Lesson of Dr Johannes Deyman," now in the Ryksmuseum at Amsterdam, of which, unfortunately, the fire of 1723 has left only a fragment, [No. 1250]; the "Portrait of Arnold Tholinx," belonging to Madame André-Jacquemart of Paris; the "Portrait of an Architect," at Cassel [No. 224], the signature and date of which, however, M. Michel declares to be forged; and the companion pictures of "A Young Man," and "A Young Woman," at Copenhagen [Nos. 273 and 274], the second of which is alone dated. There are also two undated "Portraits of Himself," painted about that time—one belonging to Lord Iveagh, the other to Lady de Rothschild; and an "Old Man," at Dresden [No. 1568]. In addition to these portraits there are two large subject-pictures—"The Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard," at Frankfort [No. 181], and "Jacob blessing Joseph's Sons," at Cassel [No. 227], besides "The Preaching of St John the Baptist," at Berlin [No. 828K]. There are, moreover, two pictures belonging to about that date—"The Denial of St Peter," in the Hermitage [No. 799], and "Pilate washing his Hands," in the collection of M. Sedelmeyer at Paris.

One, or perhaps both of these, may belong to the following year, 1657, which is otherwise lacking in important works, though it includes the "Portrait of Catrina Hoogh," known as "The Lady with the Parrot," belonging to Lord Penrhyn; "The Adoration of the Magi," at Buckingham Palace; a "Portrait of an Old Woman," belonging to M. Rodolphe Kann; and one, at Dresden [No. 1569], of "A Man sketching in a Book." It may also include the "Rabbi," in the National Gallery [No. 190], a "Portrait of a Boy," at Belvoir Castle, and "An Angel," a mere fragment of a larger picture, belonging to Mr Sellar.

1658 would seem to have been still more disastrous. Of three signed pictures, one is a "Portrait of Himself," in the collection of the Earl of Ilchester; one, "An Old Woman cutting her Nails," belonging to M. Rodolphe Kann, is undoubtedly a model; and only the "Young Man," in the Louvre [No. 2545], may be a portrait. Of the unsigned works of that time, two more are "Portraits of Himself," one belonging to Lord Ashburton, the other at Vienna [No. 1142], and one, also at Vienna [No. 1144], is probably a "Portrait of Titus," while two "Old Men," one of which is in the Pitti Palace [No. 12], are presumably models. The portrait, called "An Admiral," belonging to Mr Schaus of New York, and that of "Six," in the Six collection were, however, doubtless commissions. The subjects include one of Rembrandt's infrequent incursions into classical story in "Baucis and Philemon receiving Jupiter and Mercury," now belonging to Mr Yerkes of New York, a "Christ," in the possession of Count Orloff- Davidoff at St Petersburg, and Lord Wimborne's seated figure of "St Paul."

Few facts are more admirable in Rembrandt's checkered career than the noble struggle he maintained against misfortune and neglect. That he suffered there can be no doubt—the careworn face and whitening hair of the later portraits reveal it all too clearly,—but he stiffened his back and worked on undismayed.

Of 1659 there are six pictures fully dated, and two believed to have been, though in each the last figure of the date is missing. Both are "Portraits of Himself," one at Bridgewater House, and one at Cassel [No. 222], while a dated one, belonging to the Duke of Buccleuch, is a magnificent representation of the grave, strong face that had met and supported so much care. Three others are also portraits—"An Old Man," in the National Gallery [No. 243], the "Merchant," belonging to the Earl of Feversham, and "A Man in a Red Cloak," signed Rembran, in the collection of M. Maurice Kann at Paris. There are also two subject-pictures, both at Berlin, "Moses breaking the Tables of the Law" [No. 811], and "Jacob wrestling with the Angel" [No. 828].

To 1660 a large number of pictures is attributed, eighteen being portraits, and one, "Head of Christ," belonging to M. Maurice Kann, coming under the head of subject-pictures. Of these only four portraits are dated, and in two cases there is some doubt as to the last figure. Two of the dated portraits are of himself; one with the full date is in the Louvre [No. 2555], and one with a doubtful date belongs to Sir A. D. Neeld. Both are of extreme interest in their bearing on the personal history of Rembrandt. The portrait of the year before, belonging to the Duke of Buccleuch, shows us a man bearing some traces indeed of a struggle with adversity, but of a not altogether unsuccessful one. The character has been developed rather than shaken in the strife; the man is still strong in body, firm in mind; the hair, as far as it can be made out against the dark background, is still untouched by the hand of time; yet it is beyond question Rembrandt himself. In the two pictures now under consideration we find a change truly startling. The hair is thin and white, the face is wrinkled, the eyes weary. But it is in the character conveyed that the chief transformation is perceived; he has sunk suddenly into old age and weakness, the strength, the resolution of the man have gone out of him—he seems, stout as he was, to have broken at last. And yet in the next year he painted the finest work he ever did. There is nothing in his story to account for it. A severe illness seems the only possible explanation, followed by a remarkable, though brief, recuperation; but it is, perhaps, the greatest of the many great puzzles offered to us in the course of his history. Of the other two portraits, one, though fully signed and dated, is of a doubtful authenticity; while the date on "The Portrait of an Old Woman," belonging to Colonel Lindsay, is uncertain. The pictures painted about that year are numerous, and include a pair of portraits, husband and wife, belonging to Prince Jousoupoff; "The Capuchin," in the National Gallery [No. 166]; and two other figures in monks' robes, one belonging to Lord Wemyss, the other to Count Stroganoff; Captain Holford's portrait of a young man supposed to be "Titus"; "The Standard-Bearer," formerly at Warwick Castle but now transferred to America, and others.

There are ten pictures bearing the date 1661, one signed, but with the last figure of the date missing, and three with neither date nor signature. Of these, however, one, "The Conspiracy of Claudius Civilis," we know to have been painted that year. A second painted about the time is "The Circumcision," belonging to Earl Spencer. The third is the "Venus and Cupid," at the Louvre [No. 2543], if it should not rather be counted among the portraits, since Dr Bode believes it to represent Hendrickje Stoffels and her daughter Cornelia. The same doubt as to classification applies to the "St Matthew," also in the Louvre [No. 2538], and to "A Pilgrim at Prayer," belonging to Consul Weber at Hamburg. Two figures of "Christ," one at Aschaffenbourg, the other belonging to Count Raczynski at Posen, complete the list of subjects. There is only one "Portrait of Himself," belonging to Lord Kinnaird, the others being one of a man with a knife in his hand, nicknamed, "Rembrandt's Cook," at Downton; the "Portrait of an old Woman," in the Museum of Épinal; another "Old Woman," in the possession of Lord Wantage; "A Man," in the Hermitage [No. 821]; and the misnamed "Jansenius," belonging to Lord Ashburton. All other works of that year are, however, eclipsed by the artist's masterpiece, which, if it alone remained in existence, would compel us to place Rembrandt in the very highest rank of painters—"The Syndics of the Drapers," at Amsterdam [No. 1247].

After that eventful year, the record is a thin one. The very next, indeed, is the other of which no known picture survives. There are a pair of portraits, the "Man" in the collection of M. Maurice Kann, the "Woman" in that of M. Rodolphe Kann, which may have been painted that year; and the same may be said of a portrait called "Hendrickje Stoffels," at Berlin [No. 823B] (see ill., p. 44).

The next year is little better. A picture of "Homer reciting his Poems" alone bears part of a signature, and f., with the date 1663. It belongs to Dr Bredius, and is lent by him to the Museum at the Hague [No. 584]. 1664, again, is found on but one canvas, "The Death of Lucretia," belonging to M. Léon Gauchez of Paris, but "The Unmerciful Servant," in the Wallace collection, and the "Portrait of Himself," in the National Gallery [No. 221] (see ill., p. 46), belong to about that time. One, a "Portrait of an Old Man," in the Metropolitan Museum, New York [No. 274], is dated 1665. A portrait, signed Rembrandt f., in the collection of Mr Charles Morrison; one of himself, in that of Herr von Carstangen at Berlin; "The Jewish Bride," at Amsterdam [No. 1252], from the date on which the last figure is missing; and "David playing before Saul" were also painted about that year.

1666, however, appears on three portraits—"A Youth," belonging to Lord Leconfield; "A Woman," in the National Gallery [No. 237]; and "Jeremias de Decker," a poet who was one of Rembrandt's rare clients in his later years, at the Hermitage [No. 827]. The "Portrait of an Old Man," at Dresden [No. 1570], and two of himself—one at Vienna [No. 1143], signed but undated, and one in the Uffizi [No. 452]—were in all probability painted either that year, the one before, or the succeeding one, 1667, to which we can otherwise accord only one, a "Portrait of an Old Man," belonging to the Earl of Northbrook.

And now the tale is nearly told; 1668 occurs but once, on "The Flagellation," in the Grand-Ducal Museum at Darmstadt, absolutely the last known work of his; though three others—"Esther, Haman, and Ahasuerus," belonging to the King of Roumania; a large "Family Group," at Brunswick [No. 232]; and "The Prodigal Son," in the Hermitage [No. 797], are believed to date from that year, or possibly even the next and last.

There is still a considerable number of pictures to which no very approximate date can be assigned, but as the attempt to fully consider all the work that Rembrandt did would far exceed all reasonable limits of space, I must reluctantly leave the reader who would seek further to such assistance as the catalogue of pictures at the end of this volume may afford him.

REMBRANDT THE ETCHER

CHAPTER VIII

Indeed, the chief foundation of the belief can be shown to be frail and untrustworthy. This is the familiar title of the etching, "Christ healing the Sick," which has been known for many years as "The Hundred Guilder Print," that having been, according to the story, the sum the artist obtained for a single proof. The amount, even if he had obtained it, was hardly excessive—some nine pounds; but the facts show clearly that he never did. He exchanged a copy, still in existence, with his friend Jan Zoomer, who has left in writing on the back of it, "Given me by my intimate friend Rembrandt in exchange for 'The Pest' of M. Anthony," to which he may possibly have attached the value of a hundred guilders, though there is not a particle of evidence for even this. Gersaint, when making the catalogue, published in 1751, after his death, by Helle and Glomy, was informed that the famous proof was exchanged with a Roman merchant, and the equivalent, like Falstaff s men in buckram, had swelled to seven engravings, which were definitely valued at one hundred guilders; and thence the tradition and the name arose. What, one wonders, would the gossips, who gasped amazed at such a price, have thought could some seer have succeeded in making them believe that, little more than a hundred years later, in 1858, that very same proof with old Jan Zoomer's writing still upon it would be competed for so fiercely at public auction, that M. Dutuit paid cheerfully for it eleven hundred pounds; while even that was not a record price, since another copy was sold the year before at the Palmer sale for eleven hundred and eighty.

Still, though this piece of evidence must be abandoned, there would seem to be no doubt that the etchings were admired even in his lifetime, and, from the fact that Clement de Jonghe and Zoomer were art-dealers, we may fairly conclude that part at least of their collections appertained to their stock-in-trade. It is scarcely probable, indeed, that such highly-finished works as the larger "Raising of Lazarus," "Christ healing the Sick," "Christ preaching," "The Three Crosses," "The Good Samaritan," "The Three Trees," and others, landscapes in especial, were carried out without any subsequent attempts on Rembrandt's part to profit by them; and there is good reason for supposing that the portraits of Jan Uijtenbogaerd and Jan Cornelis Sylvius with their inscriptions and laudatory verses, were intended for sale among the followers and admirers of the two eminent ministers; but the fact remains that we can only assert with any confidence that two out of all the etchings were expressly made for publication, "The Descent from the Cross," and the "Ecce Homo," and neither of these, though signed by Rembrandt "cum privilegio," as issuing from his studio, and executed under his directions, according to the custom of the day, was worked upon by him to any great extent.

The numerous other portraits, the four illustrations to Manasseh ben Israel's work, Piedra Gloriosa, and that to Der Zeeværts-Lof, were doubtless commissions, but the payments were probably not large, since we found in the proposal made by Dirck van Cattenburch, in 1654, that an etched plate "not less finished than that of Six," was estimated at no more than four hundred florins, which, considering the amount of work entailed, was not magnificent.

When we have recalled the partnership formally entered into between Hendrickje and Titus on December 15, 1660, which has already been explained in telling the story of the artist's life, we have come to the end of the reasons for concluding that the artist made money by his etching needle.

Whence, then, it may be asked, the various proofs now in existence, the first and second, third and fourth states for which collectors pay such surprising prices, prices more often regulated by the rarity of the state than by its special artistic merits? Perhaps some of them were put into circulation by the firm of Hendrickje and Titus. There is, certainly, no mention of the plates in the inventory of the sale, and it is therefore possible that this pathetic little association for the support of a broken-down artist may have found it profitable in a small way to issue new impressions of these earlier completed plates, though it is significant in this connection, unless we can accept the theory suggested before, that Rembrandt's eyesight was failing, that at the very time when etchings were most needed he ceased to produce them.

In a very large number of cases, I suspect, they were given as presents to any sympathetic soul who had enough taste to appreciate them for their merits, or intelligence enough to foresee that they might some day prove of value. In the case of a portrait, at any rate, we know that he gave proofs to his sitter as the work went on, for on one of the first portrait of Sylvius, done in 1634, there is a note in Rembrandt's hand showing that it was one of four presented by him to the minister.

Others, again, would be given to fellow-artists, such as Lievensz, who etched also. Many undoubtedly came from the sixty portfolios of leather, which we find recorded in the inventory, where they had lain from the day when Rembrandt, having learnt the lesson or attained the effect he desired, had flung them carelessly aside to go on to some further problem. For, there seems little doubt that he never himself regarded them with any very serious consideration. They were for him only steps in his onward progress. He did them because he wanted to do them, without any thoughts of fame or profit, and he signed and dated them, or left them unsigned and undated, in the most haphazard and capricious way, good and bad alike, with the most complete indifference as to whether they were calculated to enhance his reputation or not. It was, therefore, by the inevitable irony of fate, that for these alone, for many years, was he judged worthy of remark. While Gerard de Lairesse in his Groote Schilderboek, published in 1714, was condescendingly assuring a listening public that Rembrandt's paintings were not "absolutely bad," Houbraken was recording the struggles of collectors to get possession of his etchings, and their consequent increase in price—struggles and increasings, which have gone on augmenting without intermission to the present day, until even a small representative collection of them is a luxury for the very rich alone, an absolutely perfect one of all the differing states unobtainable by a many times millionaire.

In the eighteenth century there were already famous collections of the etchings: such as those of de Burgy and van Leyden in Holland itself; of Marolles, Coypel, Silvestre, and Mariette in France; of Barnard, Sloane, Cracherode, Fawkener, and Lord Aylesford in England; and it was inevitable that the making of collections could not go on satisfactorily for long, unless there was some sort of general agreement as to what was and what was not to be included in them, so that before long the need for some catalogue to establish at any rate the preliminary basis of an agreement on disputed points became an absolute necessity.

Gersaint was the first to make the attempt, but died before his task was finished. His manuscript, however, was put up for sale, and bought by les Sieurs Helle and Glomy, as they call themselves upon the title-page of the volume in duodecimo which, after making the "necessary augmentations" of Gersaint's material, they published at Paris in 1751. An English translation of this was published by T. Jefferys in London the following year, and four years later, in 1756, Pierre Yver, an art-dealer in Amsterdam, published in that city a "Supplément," with additions and corrections. Forty years later these two works, collated and again translated into English, were the foundation of an amended catalogue by Daniel Daulby, published in London and Liverpool in 1796. A year later Adam Bartsch, keeper of the prints in the Library at Vienna, published there a catalogue in two octavo volumes, which to this day remains the chief standard of appeal, though Wilson, Charles Blanc, Vosmaer, Middleton, and others, have rejected some of the etchings which he accepted, and included others which he ignored.

There is no doubt that Bartsch was too generous in his admissions, but to what extent he carried his over-generosity is still a matter of dispute. The Chevalier de Claussin, writing in 1824, and borrowing freely, though without acknowledgment, from Bartsch, struck out 10, leaving 365; and Wilson, publishing in London in 1836, under the title of "an amateur," while owning his obligations to Bartsch, rejected 6, but added others, making 369. Vosmaer, in 1877, counted 353; Middleton, in the following year, reduced these to 329; Charles Blanc, in the 1880 edition of his work, raised the number again to 353. M. de Seidlitz, in 1890, obtained and collated the opinions of all the best living authorities, and, after an ample discussion of doubtful points, accepted 260; while M. Legros, adopting heroic methods of criticism, will only admit 71 as being certainly by Rembrandt, with an additional 42 which might be, or 113 at the most.

What, it may well be asked by the bewildered amateur, is the reason of these surprising differences? Surely, he may well say, there must be some criterion to hold by. The answer is simple, if unsatisfactory: there is not, there never has been, there never can be. There is no style to judge by; for Rembrandt had half-a-dozen styles at least, and employed them all together or separately as he listed. The signature is no guide, for many beautiful works of his have none, and many that are not his bear forged ones. The subject cannot help us, for he treated alike the most sacred incidents and the grossest improprieties. The merit of the work is no less dubious ground for judgment; for while producing, over and over again, masterpieces of the art that have never been equalled, he at other times, through carelessness, indifference, or perhaps ill-health, turned out and left for future ages stuff which most far inferior men would have obliterated there and then. We can only decide each for ourselves that such or such a plate is in no way worthy of Rembrandt, but, unless we have the courage of M. Legros, we cannot go on to assert definitely that therefore it is not his.

CHAPTER IX

In the first the kindly old lady, whoever she may be, wears a large white hood shading her forehead. The right side of her face, with the exception of the prominence of the cheekbone, is in shadow, and the strong light falling on the left side of the head brings into relief the wrinkles by the nose and at the corner of the mouth, and the soft fleshy forms of the cheek and jaw. The seemingly toothless mouth is slightly open above the strong square chin. The work is simple and straightforward, but admirably expressive of the varied forms, and the roundness and solidity of the little head are excellent. The second (B. 354) is slighter and broader in handling, the forms are expressed with greater freedom, the elaboration of the modelling in the one being often replaced by a single significant line, but the shadows are somewhat forced, which results, especially in the hollow of the cheek and on the right temple, in an excessive and unpleasant blackness. Yet the dash and surety of the line-work is very fine, and to the student it is well worth careful study through a lens. The first excels in delicacy, the second in strength.

The only etching actually known to have been executed in 1629 is the first of many portraits of himself (B. 338), very broadly and strongly etched, and worked upon in places with two needles fastened side by side, a useless device, to which he never again resorted. There are fifteen dated etchings of the year 1630. Among these are no less than six portraits or studies of himself, including an excellent "Portrait in a fur cap and light dress" (B. 24), and an admirably etched study of expression known as "Rembrandt with haggard eyes" (B. 320), which is, rather, a humorous sketch of amazed bewilderment. He also, for the first time, attempted a composition with several figures—"The Presentation in the Temple" (B. 51), distinguished as the one with the angel, which, however, was not altogether a success, owing to insufficient biting. A spirited note of "An Old Beggar Man conversing with a Woman" (B. 164), and various small heads, including two profiles of the same "Bald Man" (B. 292 and 294), which M. Michel has given sound reasons for believing to be Rembrandt's father, make up the number.

He was again his own model twice in 1631—one, with a broad hat and mantle (B. 7), being the most elaborately finished piece of work he had yet attempted. There are also two "Portraits of his Mother" (B. 348 and 349); one said to be "His Father" (B. 263) though made after his death; a brilliant little sketch of a "Blind Fiddler" (B. 138), and others. There are only three dated etchings of 1632—a little figure called "The Persian" (B. 152), the first of several pictures of "St Jerome" (B. 101), a subject which had a singular fascination for the artist, and the group of "The Rat-killer" (B. 121). Three also bear the date 1633, "An Old Woman" etched no lower than the chin (B. 351), very doubtfully identified as his mother; a badly overbitten "Portrait of Himself" with a scarf round his neck (B. 17); and one subject, "The Descent from the Cross" (B. 81), which came so utterly to grief in the biting, owing apparently to bad grounding, that it was at once abandoned, only three impressions being known, and a second undertaken, though not by himself, the work having been carried out under his supervision by some unknown pupil. Another equally important plate bearing this date, "The Good Samaritan" (B. 90), is included among the disputed etchings.

The year 1634, which brought Saskia into his home, also naturally enough brought her portrait into the list of etchings. One, with pearls in her hair (B. 347), is certainly a likeness of her, and M. Michel believes it to have been the companion plate to one of Rembrandt (B. 2), executed about the same time. Another charming piece of work, "A Young Woman Reading" (B. 345), though not a portrait, was also very possibly studied from Saskia. For subjects both the Old and New Testaments supplied inspiration, the first for a decidedly seventeenth-century Dutch rendering of "Joseph and Potiphar's Wife" (B. 39), the second for the earliest treatment of a favourite subject "Christ and the Disciples at Emmaus" (B. 88). "Christ driving the Money-lenders from the Temple" (B. 69), a crowded and unsatisfactory composition, the central figure of which was borrowed from Durer; the "Martyrdom of St Stephen" (B. 97), with some singularly bad drawing in it; and another, "St Jerome" (B. 102), were the subjects treated in 1635, which is more notable for a vivacious "Portrait of Johannes Uijtenbogaerd" (B. 279); a splendid little study of "A Mountebank" (B. 129), a model of direct etching from nature wherein there is not a superfluous line, though everything that should be is expressed; and a skilful piece of chiaroscuro, "The Pancake Woman" (B. 124).

1636 has only four etchings to show—"The Prodigal Son" (B. 91), a boldly-handled piece of work, superbly executed, full of movement and expression, but marred by the revolting hideousness of the faces; the excellent portrait of "Manasseh ben Israel" (B. 269); a charming little revelation of domestic contentment, "Rembrandt and his Wife" (B. 19); and a sheet of sketches, including a very pleasing head of Saskia (B. 365). 1637 has only one etching of importance, "Abraham dismissing Hagar" (B. 30); but for sheer skill in craftsmanship the "Young Man seated in Meditation" (B. 268) would be difficult to match.

Rembrandt's unfortunate lack of the sense of beauty is nowhere so glaringly made manifest as in the preposterous "Adam and Eve" (B. 28) of 1638; nor are the faces in an etching of that year, rejected, however, by Sir Seymour Haden, of the brothers listening to "Joseph relating His Dreams" (B. 37) much less absurd, though they are to a considerable extent atoned for by the dignified Jacob, the very human interest of Rachel, and the simple earnestness of Joseph himself. The "St Catherine," otherwise known as "The Little Jewish Bride" (B. 342), and a "Portrait of Himself with a Mezetin Cap and Feather" (B. 20), are the only others of the year. In the following year he achieved, with conspicuous success, the most ambitious etching he had yet attempted, the magnificent "Death of the Virgin" (B. 99), which, with the exception of the unfortunate angels hovering above, is admirable alike in conception and execution, attaining by straightforward simplicity the full pathos of the scene. The truthfulness and variety of attitude and expression, the wholly effective yet unforced arrangement of the composition, and the perfection of the chiaroscuro are beyond praise, and justify the somewhat bold assertion that beyond this the etcher's art cannot go. It is no matter for wonder, therefore, that this splendid plate seems to have absorbed most of the time he could devote to etching that year, for a little sketch of "A Jew in a High Cap" (B. 133), and the fine "Portrait of Himself leaning on a Stone Sill" (B. 21), alone share the date with it. His interest or his leisure would indeed appear to have been exhausted for some time, since only two small etchings, "The Beheading of St John the Baptist" (B. 92), and "An Old Man with a divided Fur Cap" (B. 265), are dated 1640.

A return of energy, however, marked 1641, from which year we have twelve dated plates; among them, the first three, to our certain knowledge, of a long series of landscapes, the elaborate study known as "Rembrandt's Mill" (B. 233), the beautiful "Cottage and Barn" (B. 225), and the "Landscape with a Cottage and Mill Sail" (B. 226). There are four subjects from scripture—a "Virgin and Child in the Clouds" (B. 61), "The Baptism of the Eunuch" (B. 98), one called "Jacob and Laban" (B. 118), and "The Angel departing from Tobit and his Family" (B. 43), in which his inability to perceive the absurd and undignified is once again demonstrated in the inflated petticoat and foreshortened legs which are all that is seen of the angel. A little night-effect, "The Schoolmaster" (B. 128), and the grand and very rare "Portrait of Anslo" (B. 271), are the most important of the remainder. With the exception of a "Bearded Man seated at a Table in an Arbour" (B. 257), the only etchings of 1642 were three sacred subjects, all small, and two of them, "The Raising of Lazarus" (B. 72) and "The Descent from the Cross" (B. 82), mere sketches. The finished plate represents "St Jerome" (B. 105), distinguished as being in Rembrandt's dark manner, seated reading at a table in a room lighted only by one window high up in front of him, so that the contrasts of light and shade are strong, and the effect very excellent.