8.1 Rembrandt or Wouwerman?
One example of connoisseurship at the centre of social interaction is the remarkable story set in the home of the Amsterdam collector Johannes Lubbeling (1696-1780).1 The young Tischbein reports how the master of the house put him to the test: 'When Mr. Lubeling saw that I knew the masters of the paintings and their styles pretty well, he showed me a painting on which a dark, iron-clad knight sat on a white horse and was heavily lit by sunlight. “I do not believe”, he said, “that you can guess who painted this picture”. I answered, “The strongly concentrated light, the clarity in the large shadows, and the almost finger-thick paint show that none other than Rembrandt painted it”. “This”, he said, “everyone thinks; but it is by Wouwerman, a rather rare painting! Even the size is unusual, since his figures are hardly longer than a finger, and this one here is probably one foot high, and done in the manner of Rembrandt”. Now I did see that Wouwerman could probably have made a picture that seemed to be by Rembrandt; but Rembrandt could not paint a horse like Wouwerman. This was a masterpiece of excellent drawing and the most beautiful horse I have seen by him. It seems he painted it completely after nature, and because he wanted all the tints to be exact, both weak and strong shadows, he put paint on paint, thus rendering his manner very close to Rembrandt's'.2
With his guessing game Lubbeling tested his visitors' knowledge and judgment. It has always been a popular prank played on fellow collectors and connoisseurs to show them works whose attributions were particularly difficult to make or tricky. The entertainment value of collections and works of art has been an aspect of social life in upper classes that should not be underestimated. In addition, a collector’s cabinet or gallery is a place of discourse: on the one hand, knowledge was exchanged here, on the other, this exchange satisfied the vanity of the collector. Connoisseurship was celebrated with pleasure, but also needed to be well-founded.
Samuel van Hoogstraten (1627-1678) already advised the art lover as a prerequisite and tool for the conversation about art (in translation): 'that the art of painting is admired in all the courts of the world and, if they are to be able to talk well on the subject, monarchs and princes need to listen to us [painters], [...] I therefore advise you to learn to understand the principles of the art of painting in broad outline, to get to know the greatest masters and to distinguish between their styles; and beside this, where the best works are to be seen – in which countries, cities and palaces. For this purpose, [the books by] Karel van Mander, Albrecht Dürer and Franciscus Junius will serve you in good stead, so that you are never short of matter for good conversations’.3 In this way, the conversation became the preferred mode of reception in art collections, so that a collection-related culture of conversation could be established. One could think of scenes like those recorded by Christiaan Andriessen (1775-1846) with the comment (in translation): ‘That’s a Rembrandt!!! I have never seen such a beautiful one before’ [3].4 The collector's riddle challenged his guests. But which reasons did Tischbein give that led him to believe initially that the painting was by the hand of Rembrandt (1606-1669)? He recognized 'strongly concentrated light' together with the 'large shadows' as central features of the composition. In addition, he emphasized 'the almost finger-thick applied paint'. On the basis of these observations, he intuitively attributed the painting to Rembrandt and at the same time defined the 'manner of Rembrandt'. After being informed about his mistake, Tischbein noticed another difference between the two painters: the horse, which he deemed to too good to be by Rembrandt.
Tischbein's assessment becomes understandable by comparing Rembrandt's The Polish Rider [4] with the works by Philips Wouwerman (1619-1668).5 Although Rembrandt's horse is prominently displayed, it neither has the same visual value in presentation nor the same delicate treatment in execution as Wouwerman’s horses. It is not without reason that Wouwerman was the most successful Dutch horse painter of the 17th century. In his paintings, which enjoyed particular popularity in France and Germany in the 18th century, the horse is always the protagonist [5].6 Both noble and bourgeois collectors were eager to acquire a work by Wouwerman. The collector Lubbeling also participated in this competition.
3
Christiaan Andriessen
That's a Rembrand!!! I haven't seen one that beautiful, 24 May 1805
Amsterdam, Stadsarchief Amsterdam
4
Rembrandt
The Polish rider, c. 1655
New York City, The Frick Collection, inv./cat.nr. 1910.1.98
5
Philips Wouwerman
The grey horse, c. 1646
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv./cat.nr. SK-A-1610
Notes
1 His son Joannis Lublink (1736-1816) is better known, for example, by the following painting: Johann Friedrich August Tischbein, Portrait of Joannis Lublink, 1790-1795, oil on canvas, 101 x 72 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum (RKDimages 127521).
2 ‘Als Herr Lubeling sah, daß ich die Meister der Bilder wie auch deren Manieren ziemlich genau kannte, zeigte er mir ein Bild, auf welchem ein dunkler, ganz mit Eisen beharnischter Ritter auf einem weißen Pferde saß und stark von der Sonne beleuchtet war. “Ich glaube nicht”, sagte er, “daß Sie erraten, von wem dies Bild gemalt ist.” Ich antwortete: “Das stark zusammengehaltene Licht, die großen Schatten mit der Klarheit und die fast fingerdick aufgetragenen Farben zeigen, daß es kein anderer gemacht hat als Rembrandt.” – “Dafür”, sagte er, “hält es auch ein jeder; aber es ist von Wouwerman, ein gar seltenes Bild! Schon die Größe ist ungewöhnlich, da seine Figuren sonst kaum die Länge eines Fingers haben und diese hier wohl einen Fuß hoch sind, und dazu ist das Ganze in Rembrandtscher Manier gearbeitet.” Nun sah ich, daß Wouwerman wohl ein Bild machen konnte, das von Rembrandt zu sein schien; aber Rembrandt konnte kein Pferd malen wie Wouwerman. Dies war ein Meisterstück von vortrefflicher Zeichnung und das schönste Pferd, welches ich von ihm gesehen habe. Es scheint, daß er es ganz fertig nach der Natur gemalt hat, und weil ihm daran gelegen sein mochte, alle Tinten, wie auch schwache und starke Schatten, genau zu haben, daß er Farbe auf Farbe setzte, wodurch er gerade der Rembrandtschen Manier so ähnlich wurde’. Mittelstädt 1956, p. 87-88. Wilhelm Tischbein, Manuscript of the Memoirs, 1811, Oldenburg, Landesmuseum für Kunst und Kulturgeschichte, PT 26, p. 29.
3 ‘[D]at de schilderkunst is bemint in alle hoven der werelt en van haar wel te kunnen spreken verplicht dikwils Vorsten en Princen ons te horen [...] daerom rade ik dat men hare gronden in 't gros lere verstaen, haer grootste Meesters kennen, en desselfs handelingen onderscheyden. Ook in wat Landen, Steden en Paleysen de beste werken te zien zijn. Hier toe zijn Vermander, Dureer, en Junius dienstig genoegh om geen stoffe gebrekt te hebben' (Hoogstraten 1657, p. 26). The translation is derived from Van de Wetering et al. 2006, p. 96.
4 'Dat is een Rembrandt!!! Zo schoon heb ik er nog geene gezien'. On the parlour game: Rehm 2020, p. 92-105.
5 See also: Rembrandt or Studio of Rembrandt, Portrait of Frederick Rihel on Horseback, 1663, oil on canvas, 294,5 x 241 cm, London, National Gallery (RKDimages 34950).
6 On Philips Wouwerman: Wegener 2009-2010, Duparc 2009-2010, Bürger 2009-2010, Schumacher 2007, Schumacher 2006, Schumacher 1994, Duparc 1993, Hofstede de Groot 1976, p. 249-681.