RKD STUDIES

In the painting Merrymakers at Shrovetide [87] we exclusively encounter depictions of hands by assistants, which appear as if created on the basis of summary specifications, perhaps a few contours and preparatory sketches. They lack a sense of precise anatomy, of plasticity, and above all of tonal values. These are exactly the qualities otherwise conveyed by Hals’s characteristic brushwork. Just how striking the differences are can be illustrated by a juxtaposition of hands by the workshop and autograph hands by the master. Searching for these, there are brilliant examples above all in the group portraits of the Haarlem civic guards. In those, we also encounter different manners of execution next to each other. There are awkwardly executed hands in thick impasto, imitating Hals’s style, sometimes placed side by side with brilliant hands done in the manner of the master.

The right hand of the Merrymakers at Shrovetide’s protagonist displays plausible contours – with the exception of the thumb which is extended to far forwards – that are filled in carefully with several thin layers of brushstrokes [88]. The fist’s light edge appears as if it has been reworked several times. The hand of lieutenant Cornelis Coning († 1636) in the Banquet of the officers of the St George civic guard of 1626-1627 (A1.30) shows an unclear anatomy and observation of light. Also, the cuff appears as if it was made from modelling clay [89]. Both form a striking contrast next to the hand of Boudewijn van Offenberch (1590-1653), seated in the center of the same group portrait [90] and the hand of captain De Wildt (1576-1630) in the contemporaneous Banquet of the officers of the Calivermen civic guard (A2.8A) [91]. In the latter, Hals has generated a clear understanding of volume using a few lines and marks of shade. Also, note the slightly extended and squeezed index finger. Unfortunately, the impression of this passage is nowadays impaired by abrasion of the paint layer. Should the contrast between a hand from 1616/1617 and others painted in 1626 or 1627 not suffice to bolster the argument, the hands in Hals’s early Banquet of the officers of the St George civic guard of 1616 (A2.0) may be additionally investigated. This group portrait of officers of the town’s militia, all of them members of Haarlem’s leading families, was the first major commission Hals received. Such a commission did not preclude the involvement of assistants, but this example does show the most consistent style of all of Hals’s civic guard pieces. Here, all hands are depicted through brushwork flowing with color, conveying the experience of a flow of light-gradations and color-tones. In contrast, the hands in Merrymakers at Shrovetide (A3.1) – illustrated here by the hands of Hans Wurst – only offer bland contour lines that are filled in first with a lighter and then with a darker shade. An assistant probably based these hands with their rude gesture on a preliminary drawing or copied them after a model. [92] [93]

87
Frans Hals (I) and workshop
Merrymakers at Shrovetide, c. 1616-1617
canvas, oil paint, 131.4 x 99.7 cm
lower center: fh
New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv.no. 14.40.605
cat.no. A3.1

It is worth going into this much detail to demonstrate the different means of representation and thus clarifying the attribution of the artworks. In the 2007 catalogue of the Metropolitan Museum, Walter Liedtke had still noted on the Merrymakers at Shrovetide: ‘its manner of execution and level of quality are entirely consistent with autograph works by the artist [...] Close study of the strongest passages, such as the bearded man’s face shows the artist’s distinctive technique, with brushstrokes that admirably model forms at the same time that they capture fleeting effects of light and shadow’.¹ However, this assessment can only be made today on the basis of a distant overall impression of the painting, as the differences in execution become apparent in the precise comparison of details. Hals not just applied himself to the composition, individual preparatory studies, and the execution of the central face and the lace collar, but his skill also appears unexpectedly in the design of the lower fifth part of the picture. A comparison with the food still lifes from the three early civic guard portraits from 1616 (A2.0) and 1626/1627 (A1.30 and A2.8A) demonstrates similarities in perspective, modelling, and observation of light [94] [95] [96]. The straightforward depiction of the individual objects in dark hues is exempt from the bright lighting that we see in the rest of the painting, and defies momentary observation. Had Hals’s monogram not been placed on the beer jug in the center, one would have difficulty attributing this area to a known artist, for there were no directly comparable still life painters in Haarlem at the time. Someone in between Pieter Claesz (c. 1597/1598-1660) and François Bonvin (1817-1887) would perhaps come to mind.

94
Detail of fig. 87
Frans Hals (I)
Merrymakers at Shrovetide, c. 1616-1617
New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Executed by Frans Hals himself