RKD STUDIES

Even in Hals’s earliest works, involvement of the workshop becomes apparent. It can be found in any of the artist’s typical motifs, where the execution is lacking the master’s confidence of design, or his typical brushwork. Consequently, such paintings could also be copies, which indeed applies to the specific areas that were painted on the basis of fully developed preparatory designs by Hals. In these instances, the viewer is challenged to decide whether he observes something that was copied overall, or whether they see an original creation that was overseen by the master, using the latter’s designs for particular motifs. The majority of paintings that were created from the 15th century onwards raise this question. Sometimes technical inspection can assist in gaining insight into the process of creation. As far as there are typical traces of a design, such as underdrawings and pentimenti, or indeed evident tracing procedures, and a copyist’s dependence on an earlier fully executed model, an original can be distinguished from a copy. The origin of an artwork can also be confirmed ton the basis of the materials and techniques which were typical for a workshop, or through identifying panels from the same tree or canvases with the same weave as in other researched paintings. Finally, there is another method of distinction which is revealed through sensitive observation – or indeed by zooming in – which concerns the individualities in the executions by assistants.

Two examples from Hals’s oeuvre demonstrate this: Portrait of a man, possibly Godfried van den Heuvel, dated 1630, in the British Royal Collection [48] and Portrait of Cornelis Coning, dated 1630 from the Allentown Art Museum [49]. Both cases concern high profile portraits, executed by probably the best assistants that Hals employed. Even though both have internalized much of Hals’s approach, their emphasis still differs from his. This can be seen in the isolation of details and the juxtaposition with similar motifs in other, contemporary works by Hals himself. While in the man’s hand in the slightly earlier Portrait of an elderly man at the Frick Collection [50], the momentum of the paint-laden brush is deliberately visible, light and dark streaks in the hand in Portrait of a man, possibly Godfried van den Heuvel form a simplistic characterization of the object. The former appears as a sketched motif, executed with a soft brush. The bend of the fingers is suggested by a turn of the brush and the brightness is graded down [51]. Contrarily, the hand in the latter example is depicted using contour lines which indicate an angular shape of the fingers [52]. This mode of observation, which is rather aimed at representation and less at the subjective visual experience, characterizes the entire painting. In the Van den Heuvel portrait, light and shadow are distributed similarly to the Frick portrait, but the uniformly opaque and impasto paint-application causes an enamel-like shine of the surface and a different craquelure pattern. The sculptural shape stands out, but all contours are blurred. In the Frick portrait, the momentary character of what we see is emphasized by the slightly raised eyebrow and opened mouth [53]. The lines that are used there to imply movement of the facial expression, are suppressed in the Van den Heuvel portrait. There, the shadow between chin and collar and the contours of the fabric folds are blended [54]. In this instance, Hals seems to have designed the composition and prepared a study of the face on a separate support. On the basis of those, the executing workshop-assistant then created a finished portrait, which comes closer to the contemporary ideal than to the sketch-like character of many paintings that were completed by Hals himself.

50
Frans Hals (I)
Portrait of an elderly man, c. 1627-1628
New York City, The Frick Collection, inv./cat.nr. 1910.1.69
© The Frick Collection
cat.no. A1.41

51
Detail of fig. 50
Frans Hals (I)
Portrait of an elderly man, c. 1627-1628
New York, The Frick Collection
© The Frick Collection

52
Detail of fig. 48
workshop of Frans Hals (I)
Portrait of a man, possibly Godfried van den Heuvel, 1630
Great Britain, The Royal Collection
© His Majesty King Charles III 2023

53
Detail of fig. 50
Frans Hals (I)
Portrait of an elderly man, c. 1627-1628
New York, The Frick Collection
© The Frick Collection

54
Detail of fig. 48
Frans Hals (I) and workshop, possibly Johannes Cornelisz. Verspronck
Portrait of a man, possibly Godfried van den Heuvel, 1630
Great Britain, The Royal Collection
© His Majesty King Charles III 2023

It stands to reason to corroborate this surprising result by comparison with further male portraits painted by Hals in the same year, such as the Portrait of a man with a black hat and gloves in hand, last reported at Otto Naumann Ltd. [55]. Just like in the Van den Heuvel portrait, the focus in the Naumann painting [56] is on the eyes, which keenly examine the viewer almost to the point of squinting. Eyelashes, lid folds, the mouth and cheeks are captured just as crisply. However, nothing of this crispness is apparent in the Van den Heuvel portrait [54]. Further differences can be found in comparison with the Allentown Portrait of Cornelis Coning [49]. Regarding the clothing of the three gentlemen from 1630, different perceptions of light effects and surface texture become apparent. These can be read as individual painterly styles. If we take the Frick portrait as a point of reference for Hals’s uniform, autograph style, we see that the brushwork and compositional accents are closest to the Naumann portrait. Here, the areas of the chest and stomach are rendered through a diagram of sequential lines – most likely in the sitter’s absence [57] [58]. For the costume in the latter, Hals has used a sequence of slightly varying bright brushstrokes to depict the reflection of the black silk. The wide dark area of the sleeve is structured by an abstract play of lines [59]. This can by no means be compared to the individual approach of the workshop assistant that is demonstrated in the Van den Heuvel painting, where the shine of the fabric’s surface is enhanced, emphasizing the three-dimensional appearance as if polished. The ornaments on the sleeve are captured in detail and variation [60].

When investigating the hands in the portraits by workshop assistants, we are faced with more executing hands – or individual styles of execution – than we ever expected. The detail-images grouped here show six details of typical executions by Frans Hals [61-64][68][69], juxtaposed with four unresolved attributions from the period between 1626-1627 and c. 1640-1645 [65][66][67][70]. In the 1627 Banquet of the Officers of the Calivermen civic guard, one of the hands is rendered with uncharacteristic yellow highlights and contours around the fingers [65]. In the 1632-1633 group portrait of the same civic guard, we can observe a very different execution of a hand: with smoothly handled and schematically drawn fingers [66]. The fingers of the sitter’s left hand in the 1634 Portrait of a woman in Baltimore appear smooth and flat, more drawn than painted [67]. Turning to the hand holding a hat in the 1630 Naumann portrait: while this detail only takes up little space within the painting, its design is all the more dashing and clear. The combination of confident anatomical rendering and a gradient of brightness in the brushstrokes that model the shadows, matches the high quality of the face and the energetic execution of the arm [68]. The difference between Hals’s characteristic manner and the approach of one his assistants can be observed nicely as well when comparing the similarly placed hands in the 1625 Portrait of Aletta Hanemans (A1.18) [69] and the much later Portrait of a woman at the Museo Soumaya (A3.40) [70]. The latter woman’s hand shows hard contours and flat modelling that differ from anything that is attributable to Hals himself.

61
Detail of cat.no. A2.8A
Frans Hals (I)
Banquet of the officers of the Calivermen civic guard, 1627
Haarlem, Frans Hals Musem

62
Detail of cat.no. A1.31
Frans Hals (I)
Portrait of a woman, 1627
Chicago, The Art Institute of Chicago

The painting at the Museo Soumaya also allows an interesting comparison to the 1640 Portrait of a woman at the Wallraf-Richartz Museum in Cologne (A1.100) [71] [72]. The former painting’s canvas has unfortunately been cut on all sides – which resulted in the loss of one of the hands – yet its composition must have strongly resembled that of the Cologne portrait. This resemblance, and the painting’s cool overall tonality in shades of grey suggests a creation in the 1640s. The uniformly smooth and opaquely applied paint is unusual for Hals, producing an uncharacteristic craquelure pattern throughout the surface. This handling sets the Soumaya portrait apart from the pastel-like, soft approach of the Cologne painting. There, the woman’s features are rendered in tonal zones that are gently placed next to each other, with sparse grey accents marking the shadows. The sitter’s eyebrows are slightly raised, and the turn of her gaze, together with a delicate hint of movement in the lips, suggest a tentative address of the viewer [74]. In the Soumaya portrait the brushwork is hard and angular, even though characteristic features from the Hals workshop are visible – such as the pose and the angle of lighting, but also the small white highlights on the edges of the collar to the left of the chin. The eyes, nose and upper lip are modelled subtly and with confident brushstrokes [73]. The portrait’s initial design can be attributed to Frans Hals, as can the woman’s clear gaze. The overall composition is likely to be by him as well. Contrarily, the execution of the cap, the pearl earring, the collar, and the dark clothing is somewhat fussy, with thin contour lines and can thus be attributed to an assistant. The same assistant is likely to have finished the left hand, while the hand’s initial design and the loosely applied cuff with its lace trim could be by Hals himself. Once more, this painting displays the difficulty of imitating the master’s ‘touch’.