Mainmenu

Rembrandt

Self portrait in a flat cap, 1642 gedateerd
Great Britain, The Royal Collection, inv./cat.nr. [..]
Bredius 1935, no. 37
<a class="recordlink artists" href="/explore/artists/66219" title="Rembrandt"><span class="text">Rembrandt</span></a>
Illustration number 1001641577
Dimensions: 542x650 pixels
License under CC BY-NC-ND by Royal Collection Trust / © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2020
<a class="recordlink artists" href="/explore/artists/66219" title="Rembrandt"><span class="text">Rembrandt</span></a>
Illustration number 1001251996
Dimensions: 539x650 pixels
License under PUB DOM
<a class="recordlink artists" href="/explore/artists/66219" title="Rembrandt"><span class="text">Rembrandt</span></a>
Illustration number IB00015323
Dimensions: 1724x2107 pixels
License undetermined
<a class="recordlink artists" href="/explore/artists/66219" title="Rembrandt"><span class="text">Rembrandt</span></a>
Illustration number 0000063094
Dimensions: 650x568 pixels
License undetermined
Suggested searches in RKDimages
Object information
Object category
painting
Support/medium
panel (oak), oil paint
Examination with x-radiography and infrared showed that this self portrait is painted on top of another (self)portrait which was probably painted around 1630 (Broekhoff/Van de Wetering 1996, p. 174-180).
Shape/dimensions
rectangle (portrait format) 70.4 x 58.8 cm
Signature/inscription
Information about the signature, dating, inscription or any other mark on the front or back of the art work
  • signed and dated center right: Rembrandt ft. / 1642
    In 1996 Van de Wetering and Broekhoff argued that both signature and date are authentic (Broekhoff/Van de Wetering 1996, p. 174-180)
Current attribution
Rembrandt
This painting was always regarded as an autograph Rembrandt until 1957. That year Winkler stated that the painting was completely overpainted by someone else than Rembrandt (Winkler 1957, p. 143). Gerson believed that Winkler's opinion was a bit "too strong", although he acknowledged that the painting "suffers somewhat from alterations" which he believed were done by Rembrandt himself (Bredius/Gerson 1969, no. 37). According to White the RRP rejected the attribution to Rembrandt in a letter dated 1972. In an unpublished examination report dated 1980-01-16, Herbert Lank concluded that this painting was a later imitation possibly made in the eighteenth century. This opinion was followed by White and published in the collection catalogue of 1982 (White 1982, no. 168, p. 111-112). Based on extensive stylistic and technical research Van de Wetering and Broekhoff argued that this painting is an autograph Rembrandt made in 1642, but that it is largely hidden under an extensive overpainting by another hand (Broekhoff/Van de Wetering 1996, p. 174-180). This attribution has since then generally been accepted (White et al. 1999, no. 57; White/De Sancha 2015, no. 168, p. 318-321).
Date
Exact or approximate dating of the described art work; the search parameters adopted for this art work in this database, are found in brackets.
dated 1642 (1642)
In 1996 Van de Wetering and Broekhoff argued that both signature and date are authentic (Broekhoff/Van de Wetering 1996, p. 174-180)
Represented
IB number
Number related to the portrait iconography collection RKD.
15323
Identification based on
resemblance
Artistically related
Artistically related to other work
Such as a preparatory studie, comparable composition, other version, or copy of the artwork in this record.
Provenance
Exhibitions and literature
Visual documentation
Technical documentation
The RKD manages a collection of technical documentation that has been given to us by external researchers and museums or which stems from the RKD's own research with infrared reflectography. Documentation can be accessed by appointment at the RKD. While not all technical documentation has been entered in the database at present, new data is added on a regular basis.
Creation date: 2000-07-31; Last modified date: 2022-09-19

Comments

No comments

My selections

My selections

Your current selection will be lost. Are you sure?