RKD STUDIES

Oil on canvas, 106 x 80.3 cm
Fort Worth, Kimbell Art Museum, inv.no. ACF 1951.01

The composition of The rommel-pot player is known in about 30 painted variants, as well as partial painted or drawn copies (D84) – among these a study formerly attributed to Jean Antoine Watteau (1684-1721) (D5) – and at least four different engravings (C5, C6, C7, C8).² Until today, Hofstede de Groot's 1910 assessment still remains valid: ‘A recognized original of this composition cannot now be traced. There are a number of replicas which at best date from the time of Frans Hals, while some perhaps come from his studio’.³

Largely, two compositional types can be distinguished: the most frequently repeated version comprises five children – as in the present painting – and the other version features six.⁴ In the former, the girl on the left looks towards the viewer, whereas in the latter, she gazes up to the rommel-pot player and is positioned on the right hand side of the boy seen in profile. In the first variant, the boy standing on the right reaches out with his hand, – perhaps trying to pick the musician’s pocket – and in the second variant he appears to have already committed his crime, seemingly hiding something in his hands. Across all known versions the quality of execution varies, with the depiction of the protagonist being most accurately maintained. Repeated attempts have been made to declare one or the other version to be the original, or at least single one out as a reliable replica of the lost prototype by Hals himself. Most recently, Slive presented the present painting as the best preserved version, and thus the original.⁵ However, the painting has noticeable weaknesses in many areas, as becomes evident when studying the detailed photograph of the children's heads.⁶ This also applies to the two heads in the door opening on the far left, whose brushwork does not display Hals’s typical soft color-transitions, but rather shows thick dabs and swipes of the brush. This could be the same assistant’s hand as the one we can distinguish in the heads of the protagonists in Merrymakers at Shrovetide (A3.1) and Young man and woman in an inn (A3.3). Nonetheless, a higher level of quality can be observed in the head of the painting’s central figure, the elderly rommel-pot player. But even there the execution does not show the brilliant autograph brushstroke which can be found for example in the facial features of The smoker (A3.2) or the Lute player (A1.15). The still reasonably good painterly quality of the picture in Fort Worth is on a par with that in the similarly sized version kept in a private collection (A4.2.1b).

The production of variants of this composition is likely to have continued for years or even decades after the creation of the prime version, which is a phenomenon worth considering. Excluding the existence of a permanently available large-scale painted original held in stock at the workshop, we may assume Hals created a drawn or sketched template of the composition, for which he may have used separate designs for the individual figures. These specific figures-studies could have been used as a basis for more and more versions. These respective variants were probably created to meet continuing demands and were accordingly commissioned to workshop-assistants, whilst later deviations were probably also created outside of Hals’s studio.

Interestingly, the figure of the rommel-pot player is preserved in a small copy that was inserted into a still life by David Bailly (1584-1657) from c. 1625 (B3) [1]. Hals’s preparatory study – which must have certainly existed – can be imagined having been a colored sketch on paper, similar to the modelli for engravings. It would have remained in the workshop together with the other studies and compositional sketches, while the finished pictures were sold and went out of reach.⁷ In 1792, another drawing by Bailly was offered at auction in Utrecht, also dated 1624 and described as ‘[…] Boontje […] in those days a well-known fool in Haarlem, playing the Rommel-pot’.⁸ If these pieces of the puzzle actually fit together, not only a likely date is set for the creation of these motifs, but also the content of the depiction can be identified more precisely. Boontje is marked as a fool by the fox's tail. The provoking noise of the rommel-pot – created by moving a stick that has been poked through a pig’s bladder which has been stretched over a pot or jug – is reminiscent of the grunting of pigs. The horrible sound is beloved only by children. As the inscription on Jan van de Velde’s (1593-1641) engraving (C5) – which renders Hals’s figure in a slight variation – describes it: ‘Many fools run around at Shrovetide / To make a half-penny grunt on a Rommel-pot’.⁹ The subject would then be the foolishness of the world, complemented by the theme of robbing the fool who collects pennies from children. The grinning man that was captured in such a pointed way is unlikely to have been created by Hals on the basis of some random model sketches. An exact likeness of a living troublemaker is more probable, captured by Hals in the same way as in the Portrait of Pieter Cornelisz. van der Morsch (A1.3), Verdonck (A1.34) and Malle Babbe (A1.103).

A4.2.1a

1
Detail of cat.no. B3
David Bailly
Vanitas still life, c. 1625
private collection

Oil on canvas, 108 x 83.8 cm
Munich, private collection

The composition and the size of this version largely correspond to the painting the Kimbell Art Museum (A4.2.1a). The depiction of the protagonist is nearly identical, while the five children's heads are executed differently but in an equally sketchy manner. The wider edges on the left and right are of interest, where a slightly bigger part of the figures has been preserved. The painted surface is severely abraded. Photographs taken during a cleaning process show the whitish ground shining through, which matches with what has been observed in the Kimbell version.¹⁰

Since Slive refers to the present painting as a ‘weak replication of the Kimbell type’, rise is given to a detailed comparison.¹¹ It is instructive to compare the facial features of the figures in both versions, which do not differ in quality but certainly do not show traces of Hals's autograph brushwork [2][3]. Therefore, both paintings must be considered to be workshop contributions that followed the same design. In addition, in both versions the faces and hands of the children are painted distinctly more cursorily than the main figure’s, while differing among themselves in quality of execution. This could indicate that there was an obligatory and precisely detailed model of the protagonist that had to be repeated exactly. Everything else could have been handled more freely.

A4.2.1b

2
Detail of cat.no. A4.2.1a

3
Detail of cat.no. A4.2.1b

Oil on panel, 49 x 38 cm
Formerly Berlin, private collection Carl von Hollitscher collection¹²

Oil on canvas, 67 x 49 cm
Sale Munich (Neumeister), 5 December 2018, lot 301

Rather coarse repetition.

A4.2.1d
© Bayer & Mitko GmbH / NEUMEISTER Münchener Kunstauktionshaus GmbH & Co. KG

Oil on canvas, 108 x 90 cm
Sale Paris, 8 May 1908, lot 39¹³

A4.2.1e

Oil on canvas, 105.5 x 90.5 cm, monogrammed upper left: FH
Sale Amsterdam (Christie’s), 7 May 1997, lot 68

As noted in the 1997 auction catalogue, this variant’s provenance as published by Slive under no. L3-5 is partially incorrect.¹⁴ The catalogue’s literature list, in its turn, erroneously refers to the 1989-1990 exhibition catalogue, where in fact our cat.no. A4.2.1b is discussed.

A4.2.1f

Oil on canvas, 109.2 x 86.3 cm
Wilton House, The Earl of Pembroke

The painting was lined and cleaned in 1930. It depicts a total of six children in slightly different movements than in the version with five children. During cleaning, overpainted background figures were revealed. Slive referred to the parallel composition in the engraving by François Hubert, which may show the present picture’s condition prior to overpainting [4].

The head of the boy with the hat next to the rommel-pot player on the left stands out in its naturalness from the group of otherwise coarse children’s faces. It is this head that was copied in a drawing [5], yet it is not clear whether the present painting was the model, or one of the similarly executed variants. The subtle depiction of the facial features confirms that at least one of the children’s faces had a detailed design, whose quality of execution approaches that of the faces in the Van Campen family picture (A2.3, A2.4, A2.5) and suggests the direct influence of an immediate model by Hals. The coarser execution of the remaining faces in the present painting is thus recognizable as an effort of the workshop, based on less detailed models. It does not seem possible to me to identify the separate hands of the assistants who may have been involved.

A4.2.1g
© Collection of the Earl of Pembroke, Wilton House, Wilts./Bridgeman Images

4
and after Frans Hals (I) François Hubert
Merry company of children surrounding a friction drum player, c. 1781-1783
The Hague, RKD – Nederlands Institute for Art History (Collection Old Netherlandish Art), inv./cat.nr. BD/0676 - ONS/Original Prints (by inventor)
cat.no. C7

5
is/was called Jean Antoine Watteau
Head of a Boy, after 1750
Rotterdam, Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, inv./cat.nr. F I 305 recto (PK)
cat.no. D5

Oil on canvas, 103 x 8.,5 cm, monogrammed: FH fecit
Munich, private collection

In its composition and size, this version is nearly identical with the one at Wilton House (A4.2.1g). An accurate comparison of the painted surface can be combined with the observation of the underdrawing, which Ella Hendriks identified in the present picture.¹⁵ It defines the figure of the rommel-pot player down into the last detail, very different from the sketchy and roughly outlining brush contours that have been observed in a number of other paintings by the Hals workshop. In addition, no pentimenti were found that would have suggested a spontaneous process of execution. Consequently, the present painting must be a copy after an existing composition. The results of Hendriks' technical examination correspond to Dutch 17th-century standard practice – with the exception of the identification of lead monoxide yellow, a rare pigment found in samples from two different areas in the painting. While not previously identified in artworks from the Hals workshop, this pigment was occasionally used in painting since the 13th century. As no definitive proof of a different date or location of origin has been found, the painting can be categorized as a product by the Hals workshop, especially considering the coloring and the typical painterly style. It is therefore also relevant to note that the signature forms part of the original paint layer and is therefore ‘authentic’. Only one other known version (A4.2.1f) also carries Hals’s ligated monogram.¹⁶

On the occasion of the Hals exhibition in Haarlem in 1990, Ella Hendriks and Koos Levy-van Halm undertook an examination of the exhibited paintings, the results of which are documented in an unpublished manuscript, kept at the RKD.¹⁷ Based on their observations of the painterly execution of the other version of the present composition (A4.2.1a), a similar painting process would be expected in the other variants. It would be interesting to compare the areas that differ between them, as deviations from the given standard composition may perhaps also be found in the underdrawings or initial sketches.

A4.2.1h

Oil on canvas, 99.5 x 73.5 cm
Sale Vienna (Dorotheum), 24 April 2024, lot 54

This variant combines elements of two compositions, the opened door in the background from the version in the Kimbell Museum (A4.2.1a) and the arrangement of the children as featured in the variant at Wilton House (A4.2.1g). Furthermore, it shows the upper edge of the door frame in the background and part of the wall above, which only appear in the variant that was offered for sale in Munich in 2018 (A4.2.1d) and in the engraving by François Hubert (1744-1809) (C7). Remnants of the ligated monogram FH can be seen on the upper edge of the door frame.

A4.2.1i
© Dorotheum, Vienna

Oil on canvas, 102 x 86 cm
Berlin, private collection

A4.2.1j

Oil on panel, 128.5 x 100.2 cm
Sale Amsterdam, 14 April 1851, lot 112¹⁸

Described in the 1851 catalogue entry as by Frans Hals, or in his manner.

Oil on panel, 54 x 43.2 cm
Private collection Destouches, Paris

This painting was probably the modello for an engraving by François Hubert (1744-1809) [4], which was published in Le Brun’s first volume of Galerie des peintres Flamands, Hollandais et Allemands of 1792. According to the accompanying text, the painting was at that time in the collection of Charles René Dominique Sochet Destouches (1727-1793). It does not, however, seem to be featured in the 1794 sale of his collection, as was stated by Slive and Hofstede de Groot.¹⁹

Oil on canvas, 100 x 80 cm, monogrammed
Sale Paris, 4-5 May 1876, lot 43²⁰

Described in the 1876 catalogue entry as: ‘The rommel-pot. The player is standing, holding his instrument, a group of children with smiling faces surround him; a little girl holds out a coin; on the right, a man wearing a wide-brimmed hat and wrapped in a coat, looks at him smiling; on the left, two young boys appear in a doorway’.²¹

Oil on canvas (?), c. 102.9 x 73.3 cm
Sale Amsterdam, 27 April 1745, lot 104²²

Described in the 1745 catalogue entry as: ‘a piece by Frans Hals, with 8 figures, being a boy with a rommel-pot, about which the others appear to be laughing’.²³

Oil on panel, 50 x 38.5 cm
Formerly Uccle, private collection Michel van Gelder

A4.2.1o

Oil on canvas, 67.3 x 55.3 cm, indistinctly signed upper left: Hals F. / Hals
Sale London (Christie’s), 7 December 2017, lot 27

In this instance, the rommel-pot player has been transformed into a fool with a spoon stuck in his large beret, holding a massive jug in front of him. As was customary in an inn, there is a row of chalk marks on the back wall that tally the guest’s drinks. Stylistically, the impasto handling in the face can be dated to the mid-1630s at the earliest. The choppy contours and stripes in the hand area are reminiscent of the style in Jan Hals’s (c. 1620-c. 1654) genre paintings.

A4.2.1p
© Christies Images Limited (2017)

Oil on canvas, 203 x 174.8 cm
Sale Amsterdam, 29 July 1845, lot 78²⁴

Described in the 1845 catalogue entry as: ‘a man holding a rommel-pot, together with two boys. Broadly executed’.²⁵

Oil on panel, 39.1 x 30.5 cm
Chicago, The Art Institute of Chicago, inv.no. 1947.78

This version is much reduced in size, compared to the variants to which it is related (A4.2.1a, A4.2.1b). Slive pointed to the stylistic relationship between the present picture and Judith Leyster’s (1609-1660) monogrammed painting Two children with a cat, dated 1629 (A4.2.10).²⁶ Both paintings are based closely on Hals’s models. Hofrichter concurred and included the present painting in her catalogue raisonné on Leyster, presenting it in comparison with the Merry Trio in the Nasjonalmuseet in Oslo (A4.2.11), with which the relationship is even closer.²⁷ The suggested date of c. 1626-1630 corresponds with the context of this attribution. Of particular interest are the gaps of time between the different versions in the rommel-pot group, which suggests the availability of sketches, a copy in color, or at least a partial copy in the workshop.

A4.2.1r

Oil on panel, 62 x 40 cm
Sale Vienna, 12 May 1924, lot 92

A4.2.1s

Oil on panel, 39 x 32 cm
Rottach-Egern, art dealer Wilhelm Mohnen

A4.2.1t

Oil on canvas, 67 x 57 cm
Sale Vienna (Dorotheum), 12-14 March 1954, lot 54

A4.2.1u

Oil on canvas, 90 x 69.2 cm
Maastricht, Van Den Berg Fine Art

The composition of this painting is based on a template by Frans Hals, possibly the same version of the main figure alone, which is also depicted in David Bailly's Vanitas Still Life (B3) [1]. However, it may also be a partial copy after one of the previously known versions. The distinctive, much smoother, brushwork and the differences in the highlights make it difficult to determine which artwork has served as the direct model for this painting.²⁸

A4.2.1v

Oil on canvas, 68 x 49 cm
Sale The Hague, 19 April 1939, lot 51

Depicts only the figure of the rommel-pot player.

A4.2.1w

Oil on canvas, 110 x 90.5 cm
Sale Versailles (Palais des Congrès), 29-30 May 1968, lot 76

A4.2.1x

Oil on panel, 109.2 x 83.8 cm
Whereabouts unknown

A4.2.1y

Oil on canvas, 41 x 33 cm
Menton, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Menton du Palais de Carnolès, inv.no. R.F. 1946-37

Nearly identical to the variant in The Art Institute of Chicago (A4.2.1r)

A4.2.1z